HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
kvark
WebGLNext-Proposals
OPEN SOURCE2017–2020
kvark / WebGLNext-Proposals

WebGLNext-Proposals

Proposals for the design of the WebGL Next API.

Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
5Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
5GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Proposals for the design of the WebGL Next API.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2017-03-21 16:34:46 UTC to 2020-04-23 17:15:04 UTC.

012342017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 3 submissions, 1 comments20172018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2020

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC431
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

5 sources
kvark·Apr 23, 2020
This isn't JS to Vulkan. You are talking about the Obsidian proposal [1] that was not accepted or implemented. WebGPU is higher level. High enough to hide the most nasty aspects of Vulkan, yet low enough to still extract the performance benefits of a proper API. Implementing validation and proper input sanitation is undoubtedly a big challenge. Each browser engine(!) vendor is going to be tackling that separately. We are ready to learn on Vulkan mistakes and drive this story of validation and CTS to be better. One of the things that make a difference in comparison to Vulkan is that validation is not an afterthought, not a side developer assistance tooling. Validation is in the core of WebGPU, it's mandatory and always enabled, so chances are it will be more polished. [1] https://github.com/kvark/WebGLNext-Proposals/blob/obsidian/O...
In A Taste of WebGPU in Firefox

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.