Bart Janssens wrote:
> On 5/3/08, Joaquín Duo <
hoakoduo@...> wrote:
> > This way the user could define a GPU pipeline (data) with a pipeline of K-3D
>
>> modifiers. And at any point of the pipeline we could connect that data to a
>> "GPUPipelineEvaluator" plugin that gives the output through a property.
>> What about this idea?
>>
>
> It's a good idea! Having a CUDAtoK3D or K3DtoCUDA node whenver a
> conversion is required would not require any change to the SDK.
> However, we should probably wait for some benchmarking results before
> we fix the design.
>
The approach of using a "CUDABitmap / CUDAMesh" data type to allow the
pipeline to work normally is a clever one, albeit with a significant
downside: it requires the user to explicitly create a "CUDA-aware"
pipeline. Each of the three alternative approaches has its
pros-and-cons. Let's ensure that we have some significant examples to
benchmark before making recommendations. At a minimum we need to see
some mesh computations, both embarassingly-parallel and not.
Cheers,
Tim
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone_______________________________________________
K3d-development mailing list
K3d-development@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/k3d-development
