What are the plans for Irrlicht 1.8 and further?

[Mel]

I've been reading on this matter, and i have found an interesting point that no one seems to have interest into, and i think it could definately boost the posibilities of the engine, i speak of the vertex textures. With the need to pass large amounts of data to the shaders (to instance instead of 50 copies, more than 2000 if there were vertices enough for example), a vertex texture seems the best place to place large amounts of data for the shaders that can be accessed per vertex.

How about it?

[hendu]

That's already completely supported, at least in GL AFAIK?

(though, using it to improve the hacky instancing is still something I don't get, when true geometric instancing could be used instead)

[Mel]

Is it?... i couldn't make use of it, or maybe i haven't made correct use of it.

Well, in GL yes, there is instancing, but not in DX9C (DX10 and above, when they are ready will, i guess...) Though, helping with instancing geometry isn't their only utility, for instance, displacement maps, animated meshes rendering with multiple bones and static geometry animation are one of the many features it may help. And because it is a pixel shader 3 feature, i suposed it wouldn't be enabled in order to advance on other more compatible areas.

[hendu]

Using the Geometry Instancing API provided by DirectX 9 and fully supported in hardware by GeForce 6 Series GPUs....

http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems2/gpugems2_chapter03.html

It's merely not wrapped in irrlicht yet.

[Mel]

That's already completely supported, at least in GL AFAIK?

I went over the code of Irrlicht in the DX driver when it came to vertex texture objects, and no, for DX vertex textures still aren't supported. Maybe in OpenGL, the normal textures can be used the same on VS an FS, but on DX is diferent. There are 4 registers in which the vertex textures can be declared.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx

For DX, vertex textures are diferent than the regular ones.

[hendu]

Yep, DX is more limited. Use GL

[Mel]

I rather DX, it is faster

[Nadro]

I rather DX, it is faster

It's depend on drivers and dx/ogl implementation in an engine. One time dx is faster, another time will be ogl. Personally I prefer ogl, because it's open and cross platform solution.

[Mel]

Yeah, that is the point of OpenGL precisely, anyway, my tests have always revealed me that Ogl in my machines are slower than DX. Too bad i've gotten so used to DX PS30 shaders now to switch to GL, i'd switch to CG instead.

Still, i am also not sure about GL being able to use vertex textures though, i have seen some samples of OpeGL using them, and seems they need their some extensions to work.

Sort of a return to the topic... What is it going to be in Irr 1.8? After so much petitions, and stuff, i guess that the plans will be more or less clear now, or not?

[hybrid]

We have a feature freeze for the 1.8 release, to avoid further delays. So nothing will be part of 1.8 which is not already in trunk. only bug fixing will happen now and a short beta phase