- From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:11:09 -0700
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Cc: public-fx@w3.org
I don't think this should be part of the first version of this specification. Dean On 20/10/2011, at 12:14 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote: > Carrying on from the [css-shaders] discussion on www-style, in which it has been proposed that webgl shaders > be usable through the css filter() property... > > CSS Shaders editorial draft: > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/raw-file/tip/custom/index.html > > > I'd like to explore the use of JS as an additional route for authors to write shaders. > > The Web Workers specifications and Transferable semantics ( postMessage ) are reasonable mature, nowadays. > > There are now two implementations for parallelism in tight JavaScript loops: > > W16 for the V8 JS Engine: > https://github.com/sheremetyev/w16 > > River Trail, a Firefox extension: > https://github.com/RiverTrail/RiverTrail > > > Web Workers is isolated and off-thread; the structured clone algorithm allows for transferring > buffers across threads without needing to copy the buffer. The recent parallel extensions for Firefox and V8 > demonstrate that JS can be used across multiple cores, in an array programming style. > > This seems like a natural progression. > > Intel writing that River Trail can work well within existing semantics as well as Web GL: > http://blogs.intel.com/research/2011/09/pjs.php > > > > -Charles > > >
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2011 23:11:46 UTC