This reverts commit 4cfe90bde2.
GLSL 1.00 on GLES doesn't support unsized arrays so the whole idea
can't work.
Conflicts:
clutter/cogl/cogl/cogl-pipeline-glsl.c
The check for whether we can reuse a program we've already generated
was only being done if the pipeline already had a
glsl_program_state. When there is no glsl_program_state it then looks
for the nearest ancestor it can share the program with. It then
wasn't checking whether that ancestor already had a GL program so it
would start generating the source again. It wouldn't however compile
that source again because _cogl_pipeline_backend_glsl_end does check
whether there is already a program. This patch moves the check until
after it has found the glsl_program_state, whether or not it was found
from an ancestor or as its own state.
Under GLES2 we were defining the cogl_tex_coord_in varying as an array
with a size determined by the number of texture coordinate arrays
enabled whenever the program is used. This meant that we may have to
regenerate the shader with a different size if the shader is used with
more texture coord arrays later. However in OpenGL the equivalent
builtin varying gl_TexCoord is simply defined as:
varying vec4 gl_TexCoord[]; /* <-- no size */
GLSL is documented that if you declare an array with no size then you
can only access it with a constant index and the size of the array
will be determined by the highest index used. If you want to access it
with a non-constant expression you need to redeclare the array
yourself with a size.
We can replicate the same behaviour in our Cogl shaders by instead
declaring the cogl_tex_coord_in with no size. That way we don't have
to pass around the number of tex coord attributes enabled when we
flush a material. It also means that CoglShader can go back to
directly uploading the source string to GL when cogl_shader_source is
called so that we don't have to keep a copy of it around.
If the user wants to access cogl_tex_coord_in with a non-constant
index then they can simply redeclare the array themself. Hopefully
developers will expect to have to do this if they are accustomed to
the gl_TexCoord array.
For shader generation backends we don't need to worry about changes to
the texture object and changing the user matrix. The missing user
matrix flag was causing test-cogl-multitexture to regenerate the
shader every frame.
We don't want to use gl_PointCoord to implement point sprites on big
GL because in that case we already use glTexEnv(GL_COORD_REPLACE) to
replace the texture coords with the point sprite coords. Although GL
also supports the gl_PointCoord variable, it requires GLSL 1.2 which
would mean we would have to declare the GLSL version and check for
it. We continue to use gl_PointCoord for GLES2 because it has no
glTexEnv function.
GLES2 has no glAlphaFunc function so we need to simulate the behaviour
in the fragment shader. The alpha test function is simulated with an
if-statement and a discard statement. The reference value is stored as
a uniform.
The GLSL pipeline backend can now generate code to represent the
pipeline state in a similar way to the ARBfp backend. Most of the code
for this is taken from the GLES 2 wrapper.
We now prepend a set of defines to any given GLSL shader so that we can
define builtin uniforms/attributes within the "cogl" namespace that we
can use to provide compatibility across a range of the earlier versions
of GLSL.
This updates test-cogl-shader-glsl.c and test-shader.c so they no longer
needs to special case GLES vs GL when splicing together its shaders as
well as the blur, colorize and desaturate effects.
To get a feel for the new, portable uniform/attribute names here are the
defines for OpenGL vertex shaders:
#define cogl_position_in gl_Vertex
#define cogl_color_in gl_Color
#define cogl_tex_coord_in gl_MultiTexCoord0
#define cogl_tex_coord0_in gl_MultiTexCoord0
#define cogl_tex_coord1_in gl_MultiTexCoord1
#define cogl_tex_coord2_in gl_MultiTexCoord2
#define cogl_tex_coord3_in gl_MultiTexCoord3
#define cogl_tex_coord4_in gl_MultiTexCoord4
#define cogl_tex_coord5_in gl_MultiTexCoord5
#define cogl_tex_coord6_in gl_MultiTexCoord6
#define cogl_tex_coord7_in gl_MultiTexCoord7
#define cogl_normal_in gl_Normal
#define cogl_position_out gl_Position
#define cogl_point_size_out gl_PointSize
#define cogl_color_out gl_FrontColor
#define cogl_tex_coord_out gl_TexCoord
#define cogl_modelview_matrix gl_ModelViewMatrix
#define cogl_modelview_projection_matrix gl_ModelViewProjectionMatrix
#define cogl_projection_matrix gl_ProjectionMatrix
#define cogl_texture_matrix gl_TextureMatrix
And for fragment shaders we have:
#define cogl_color_in gl_Color
#define cogl_tex_coord_in gl_TexCoord
#define cogl_color_out gl_FragColor
#define cogl_depth_out gl_FragDepth
#define cogl_front_facing gl_FrontFacing
This applies an API naming change that's been deliberated over for a
while now which is to rename CoglMaterial to CoglPipeline.
For now the new pipeline API is marked as experimental and public
headers continue to talk about materials not pipelines. The CoglMaterial
API is now maintained in terms of the cogl_pipeline API internally.
Currently this API is targeting Cogl 2.0 so we will have time to
integrate it properly with other upcoming Cogl 2.0 work.
The basic reasons for the rename are:
- That the term "material" implies to many people that they are
constrained to fragment processing; perhaps as some kind of high-level
texture abstraction.
- In Clutter they get exposed by ClutterTexture actors which may be
re-inforcing this misconception.
- When comparing how other frameworks use the term material, a material
sometimes describes a multi-pass fragment processing technique which
isn't the case in Cogl.
- In code, "CoglPipeline" will hopefully be a much more self documenting
summary of what these objects represent; a full GPU pipeline
configuration including, for example, vertex processing, fragment
processing and blending.
- When considering the API documentation story, at some point we need a
document introducing developers to how the "GPU pipeline" works so it
should become intuitive that CoglPipeline maps back to that
description of the GPU pipeline.
- This is consistent in terminology and concept to OpenGL 4's new
pipeline object which is a container for program objects.
Note: The cogl-material.[ch] files have been renamed to
cogl-material-compat.[ch] because otherwise git doesn't seem to treat
the change as a moving the old cogl-material.c->cogl-pipeline.c and so
we loose all our git-blame history.
