Advertisement

What do you think about cg?

Started by June 13, 2002 10:26 AM
12 comments, last by Austrian Coder 22 years, 8 months ago
What''s with this Nvidia anyway?80 mb download!!!Why is it bloating up all its toolkit releases and trying to grab all the attention by mixing the parser release with Cg specification.

Initially I didnt like Cg as it may shadow OpenGl 2.0''s Shading Language . But now I think an API independent shading language is really cool.It might be nice if OpenGL 2.0 uses Cg as its shading language than its own.(OMG what am I saying?)So that instead of the API being updated according to new features(programmable) in hardware only the Language can be updated.

What do you say Davepermen?
and hey is Ice Age really that good?
Bah. I liked the whole "High Level Shading Language" back when it was introduced as a proposal for standardization by 3DLabs. Nobody seems to recognize that this isn''t a new idea, merely an implementation of what''s been talked about, and documented for the last year.

The difference is, 3Dlabs and ATI have been pursuing standardization through the ARB, while nVidia seeded developers with an early implementation of their own proposal so they could later call it a standard.

It makes me physically sick.
Advertisement
Cg still has lot''s of competitors. The problem is we don''t do who''s going to win.

Currently I don''t really like Cg because i don''t know how to utilize that fragment Shader for OpenGL... (got any demos of Fragment Shader under OpenGL ?).

Basicly Cg is just a high lave implemetation of Vertex/Pixel Program/Shader. Currently it is still possible to stick with the ASM code.

The standard isn''t clear (and my Voodoo3 is ressissting Vertex Program ^^)
Help me with my Isometric OpenGL engine.
This is something that I honestly don''t know much about, but I see it as somebody finally doing something about a pretty lacking aspect to openGL. We can talk about the openGL 2.0 spec forever, but until something is actually running, it''s not a thing.

I see cg as being akin to glide. There was no standard, so 3dfx did what they had to do to get where they wanted to be. glide is dead and cg certainly won''t last beyond openGL 2.0, but in the meantime, hopefully it''ll get people to push harder for some standards and people can at least experiment with stuff that was previously too complicated to attempt.

Or maybe not....

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement