nordic-dev.net/wgpu
nordic-dev.net/wgpu
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/gfx-rs/wgpu.git synced 2024-11-21 22:33:49 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs(CHANGELOG): ref. #4400 directly in v23 entry (#6488)

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Erich Gubler 2024-11-02 14:41:59 -04:00 committed by GitHub
parent 16f012bc93
commit 3ecfe7e220
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
CHANGELOG.md
View File

@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ This may not sound exciting, but let us convince you otherwise! All major web br
WGPU also benefits from standard, portable behavior in the same way as web browsers. Because of this behavior, it's generally fairly easy to port over usage of WebGPU in JavaScript to WGPU. It is also what lets WGPU go full circle: WGPU can be an implementation of WebGPU on native targets, but _also_ it can use _other implementations of WebGPU_ as a backend in JavaScript when compiled to WASM. Therefore, the same dynamic applies: if WGPU's own behavior were significantly different, then WGPU and end users would be _sad, sad humans_ as soon as they discover places where their nice apps are breaking, right?
The answer is: yes, we _do_ have sad, sad humans that really want their WGPU code to work _everywhere_. As Firefox and others use WGPU to implement WebGPU, the above example of Firefox diverging from standard is, unfortunately, today's reality. It _mostly_ behaves the same as a standards-compliant WebGPU, but it still doesn't in many important ways. Of particular note is Naga, its implementation of the WebGPU Shader Language. Shaders are pretty much a black-and-white point of failure in GPU programming; if they don't compile, then you can't use the rest of the API! And yet, it's extremely easy to run into this:
The answer is: yes, we _do_ have sad, sad humans that really want their WGPU code to work _everywhere_. As Firefox and others use WGPU to implement WebGPU, the above example of Firefox diverging from standard is, unfortunately, today's reality. It _mostly_ behaves the same as a standards-compliant WebGPU, but it still doesn't in many important ways. Of particular note is Naga, its implementation of the WebGPU Shader Language. Shaders are pretty much a black-and-white point of failure in GPU programming; if they don't compile, then you can't use the rest of the API! And yet, it's extremely easy to run into a case like that from <https://github.com/gfx-rs/wgpu/issues/4400>:
```wgsl
fn gimme_a_float() -> f32 {