Isn't that what the Zink, ANGLE, or GLOVE projects meant to provide? Allow you to program in OpenGL, which is then automatically translated to Vulkan for you.
replyI don't see the point of those when I can just directly use OpenGL. Any translation layer typically comes with limitations or issues. Also, I'm not that glued to OpenGL, I do think it's a terrible API, but there just isn't anything better yet. I wanted Vulkan to be something better, but I'm not going to use an API with entirely pointless complexity with zero performance benefits for my use cases.
replyThose are mostly designed for back porting and not new projects. OpenGL is dead for new projects.
replyI do all my new projects in OpenGL and Cuda since I'm not smart enough for Vulkan.
reply> OpenGL is dead for new projects.
replySays who? Why?
It looks long term stable to me so I don't see the issue.
DirectX 9 is long term stable so I don't see the issue...
replyNo current gen console supports it. Mac is stuck on OpenGL 4.1 (you can't even compile anything OpenGL on a Mac without hacks). Devices like Android run Vulkan more and more and are sunsetting OpenGLES. No, OpenGL is dead. Vulkan/Metal/NVN/DX12/WebGPU are the current.
The aforementioned abstraction layers exist. You had dismissed those as only suitable for backporting. Can you justify that? What exactly is wrong with using a long term stable API whether via the native driver or an abstraction layer?
replyEdit: By the same logic you could argue that C89 is dead for new projects but that's obviously not true. C89 is eternal and so is OpenGL now that we've got decent hardware independent implementations.
Wasn't it announced last year that it was getting a new mesh shader extension?
reply