Re: Shaderc as a JS library

oops. wrong thread. reposting in the correct thread.

With dev tools open I actually get much less variance in my results (maybe
performance.now behaves differently).

Now I'm getting 32-37 ms for "void main() {}" and 46-49 ms to compile the
big shadertoy from earlier.

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 5:57 PM Kai Ninomiya <kainino@google.com> wrote:

> Maciej,
> Absolutely. These are on my to-do list, but they're harder to check and
> compare with native.
>
> I quickly measured the compile time itself (excluding loading, I don't
> know offhand how to measure that), and got about 85-140 ms for this tiny
> "main(){}" shader. I don't know how this compares with native.
>
> -Kai
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 5:34 PM Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:26 PM, Kai Ninomiya <kainino@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Yesterday I compiled shaderc into a JS library with the minimal entry
>> points needed to compile GLSL to SPIRV inside a web application.
>>
>> <Screenshot from 2017-10-24 17-17-52.png>
>>
>> Source (But don't try to build this yet, it won't work - needs manual
>> intervention during build).
>>
>> https://github.com/kainino0x/shaderc/commit/1035e488ac3dcf759d6017328abf20d1d39b672f
>>
>> kainino@kainino> du -b shaderc.*
>> 176816  shaderc.js
>> 45094   shaderc.js.gz
>> 2007815 shaderc.wasm
>> 589023  shaderc.wasm.gz
>> So a total of 634,117 bytes between shaderc.js.gz and shaderc.wasm.gz.
>>
>> (built with emcc -Oz
>> <https://kripken.github.io/emscripten-site/docs/tools_reference/emcc.html#emcc-oz>;
>> js files are the wasm wrappers, not asm.js)
>>
>>
>> Other interesting performance questions:
>>
>> - What's the runtime memory cost of loading or using these libraries?
>> - How long does it take to transpile a typical shader?
>>
>>