-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 386
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Allow depth&&stencil result if depth||stencil requested. #987
Conversation
We don't want to encourage !depth&&!stencil result if depth xor stencil.
That sounds reasonable and likely already the way that this is implemented. |
Actually I had forgotten, but WebGL 1 went the other way on this for portability reasons:
I was remembering the original behavior before we ran into the portability issues that caused the wording we have today. WebGL 2 made them strict, non-optional:
Behind the scenes depth-xor-stencil are almost always DEPTH24_STENCIL8 with special handling. |
I'm fine with this, as it trends towards my overall desire to have the opaque framebuffer mimic the default framebuffer behavior. Especially since any backwards compatibility issues introduced by the change would be vanishingly rare in practice. You're only going to be surprised by having a stencil buffer when you didn't expect one if you've enabled stencil test, which you really shouldn't be doing if you don't think you have a stencil buffer. On the flip side, I have a hard time imagining ANY type of XR content that will ask for a stencil buffer but explicitly not a depth buffer. I'll take a pass at updating the spec text like @jdashg suggested above. Worth noting that it seems like the WebGL spec is mildly self-contridictary on this subject, as in one location it says:
Then further down, in the Context creation parameters section, states:
Which implies more strictness than the prior paragraph. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sigh
I'll take a pass at updating the spec text like @jdashg suggested above.
... I say, not realizing that I'm making a comment in a pull request. 🙄
Change LGTM, I'd like @Manishearth to give a thumbs up as well prior to merging.
Hey Jeff, can you make sure your GitHub account is linked to the Mozilla org so that our ipr process is happy with the change? Details here |
Yep, sorry!
…On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 8:59 AM Brandon Jones ***@***.***> wrote:
Hey Jeff, can you make sure your GitHub account is linked to the Mozilla
org so that our ipr process is happy with the change? Details here
<https://labs.w3.org/repo-manager/pr/id/immersive-web/webxr/987>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#987 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALHJDPELM6H3DLLOIZOQI3RIOHEZANCNFSM4LOB2QEA>
.
|
Should work now, though I can't retrigger myself. ("Pull Request Loading"
hits " NetworkError when attempting to fetch resource.")
…On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 7:20 PM Jeff Dash ***@***.***> wrote:
Yep, sorry!
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 8:59 AM Brandon Jones ***@***.***>
wrote:
> Hey Jeff, can you make sure your GitHub account is linked to the Mozilla
> org so that our ipr process is happy with the change? Details here
> <https://labs.w3.org/repo-manager/pr/id/immersive-web/webxr/987>
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#987 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALHJDPELM6H3DLLOIZOQI3RIOHEZANCNFSM4LOB2QEA>
> .
>
|
Great, thanks! Revalidate was finicky but it looks like it worked. |
We don't want to encourage !depth&&!stencil result if depth xor stencil.