Comment Re:Wrong. (Score 2) 71
Yes, we have done shared memory transport with Accelerated-X for quite a while now. However for 2D it just doesn't make a lot of sence anymore. If you have a good 2D core implementation you'll get already very close to the maximum without this type of transport (assuming that you use the MIT-SHM extension for images).
For 3D that's a different story. OpenGL does support something called a direct rendering context. This is a GLX context that has semantics that allow libGL.so to be implemented in a way that it talks directly to hardware. In any case I feel that it would be foolish to expose an API that allows talking to hardware to a programmer. It's way to complex and gives to much opprtunity to screw things up (not intentionally, but hey, show me a bugfree piece of HW). Having OpenGL there and let libGL.so do the talking to the hardware makes way more sence.
- Thomas
For 3D that's a different story. OpenGL does support something called a direct rendering context. This is a GLX context that has semantics that allow libGL.so to be implemented in a way that it talks directly to hardware. In any case I feel that it would be foolish to expose an API that allows talking to hardware to a programmer. It's way to complex and gives to much opprtunity to screw things up (not intentionally, but hey, show me a bugfree piece of HW). Having OpenGL there and let libGL.so do the talking to the hardware makes way more sence.
- Thomas
