vello

D app. The other is that we're trying to make the renderer more modular so we have separate libraries for color space conversion and image filters (blur etc). To get maximal performance, you don't want to write out the blur result to a full-resolution texture, but rather have a function that can sample from an intermediate result. See [1] for more context and discussion of that point. Stitching together these separate pieces of shader is a major potential source of developer friction. There is a happy path in the Rust ecosystem, albeit with some compromises, which is to fully embrace WGSL as the source of truth. The pieces can be combined with string-pasting, though we're looking at WESL as a more systematic approach. With WGSL, you can either do all your shader compilation at runtime (using wgpu for native), or do a build.rs script invoking naga to precompile. See [2] for the main PR that implements the latter in vello_hybrid. In the former case, you can even have hot reloading of shaders; implemented in Vello main but not (yet) vello_hybrid. To get the same quality of developer experience with Slang, you'd need an implementation in Rust. I think this would be a good thing for Slang. I've consistently underestimated the importance of developer friction in the past. As a contrast, we're also doing a CPU-only version of Vello now, and it's absolutely night and day, both for development velocity and attracting users. I think it's possible the GPU world gets better, but at the moment it's quite painful. I personally believe doing a Rust implementation of the Slang compiler would be an important step in the right direction, and is worth funding. Whether the rest of the world agrees with me, we'll see. [1]: https://xi.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/197075-vello/topic/... [2]: https://github.com/linebender/vello/pull/1011

ite a general 3D renderer that works in a wide variety of situations, that does not work well in practice. I wish Rust had one. I've tried Rend3 (abandoned), and looked at Renderling (in progress), Orbit (abandoned), and Three.rs (abandoned). They all scale up badly as scene complexity increases. There's a friction point in design here. The renderer needs more info to work efficiently than it needs to just draw in a dumb way. Modern GPSs are good enough that a dumb renderer works pretty well, until the scene complexity hits some limit. Beyond that point, problems such as lighting requiring O(lights * objects) time start to dominate. The CPU driving the GPU maxes out while the GPU is at maybe 40% utilization. The operations that can easily be parallelized have been. Now it gets hard. In Rust 3D land, everybody seems to write My First Renderer, hit this wall, and quit. The big game engines (Unreal, etc.) handle this by using the scene graph info of the game to guide the rendering process. This is visually effective, very complicated, prone to bugs, and takes a huge engine dev team to make work. Nobody has a good solution to this yet. What does the renderer need to know from its caller? A first step I'm looking at is something where, for each light, the caller provides a lambda which can iterate through the objects in range of the light. That way, the renderer can get some info from the caller's spatial data structures. May or may not be a good idea. Too early to tell. [1] https://github.com/linebender/vello/