Re:Chrome dev on WebGL security and Microsoft bullshit
by icefox on Tuesday June 21, 2011 @09:38AM
(#2678675)
I am not familiar with flash's api, can anyone point us to the docs in flash on how to access the shaders or a specific example?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Chrome dev on WebGL security and Microsoft bullshit
by ken_railey on Tuesday June 21, 2011 @11:15AM
(#2679071)
The shader language is called AGAL, here is an intro: http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplatform/2011/04/intro-to-adobe-...
Re:Chrome dev on WebGL security and Microsoft bullshit
by malkia on Tuesday June 21, 2011 @12:51PM
(#2679454)
Thanks, never heard of it. But why would they chose something so low-level that looks like assembly (reminds of the old shaders - I guess I have to read, maybe... easier translation for CPU if there is no GPU?).
Re:Chrome dev on WebGL security and Microsoft bullshit
by Impossible on Tuesday June 21, 2011 @03:13PM
(#2679987)
Adobe also has a tool called Pixelbender 3D where you can write shaders in their flavor of HLSL. Its an extension to pixel bender (which was for 2D shaders only). Pixelbender 3D has to be used offline though, so if you want to embed shaders in a swf they have to be written in assembly. The reasoning for this is that the pixelbender shader compiler is larger than any single part of the flash runtime, so it would greatly bloat the flash runtime for a little bit of developer convenience. Adobe has done a poor job of showing that you can use high level shader code in their demos though, pixelbender will end up being the preferred way to author shaders for molehill, the assembly stuff will only be used by a few people for tests\quick hacks.
Re:Chrome dev on WebGL security and Microsoft bullshit
by cube13 on Tuesday June 21, 2011 @10:20AM
(#2678833)
Until recently, Flash didn't even use any hardware acceleration for video. I don't believe that it actually gives the direct access to the hardware that WebGL does. So while it's still a security risk(especially given Adobe's track record), I'm not entirely convinced that it's a greater potential risk than WebGL.
Re:Chrome dev on WebGL security and Microsoft bullshit
by recoiledsnake on Tuesday June 21, 2011 @10:26AM
(#2678854)
True. Flash is a plugin that Adobe ships, whereas IE is the responsibility of Microsoft because it ships with Windows. Flash taking a risky bet is different from the IE shipping potentially vulnerable code with the Windows box.