seeseemelk/cool-retro-term
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 449 Pull Requests 12 Actions Packages Projects Releases 8 Wiki Activity

Fix: added missing default precision directives in fragment shaders #215

Merged
theridane merged 1 commits from master into master 2015-01-28 10:46:22 +01:00
Conversation 6 Commits 1 Files Changed 3 +7
theridane commented 2015-01-28 00:19:52 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Term launched without rendering (all #ff00ff pink) and the glsl compiler was complaining about

qml: *** Fragment shader ***
0:7(53): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3'
0:7(38): error: no precision specified this scope for type `float'
0:9(16): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec2'
0:9(43): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3'
0:9(94): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3'
0:9(173): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3'

probably because Qt defaults to OpenGL ES on my system, where precision needs to be specified on all types. Might be good to add #version directives to shaders to avoid glsl version ambiguity.

Term launched without rendering (all #ff00ff pink) and the glsl compiler was complaining about ``` qml: *** Fragment shader *** 0:7(53): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3' 0:7(38): error: no precision specified this scope for type `float' 0:9(16): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec2' 0:9(43): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3' 0:9(94): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3' 0:9(173): error: no precision specified this scope for type `vec3' ``` probably because Qt defaults to OpenGL ES on my system, where precision needs to be specified on all types. Might be good to add #version directives to shaders to avoid glsl version ambiguity.
Swordfish90 commented 2015-01-28 10:50:29 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

You are definitely right, thanks. I also think that #version might be useful, as well as tweaking the precisions values since they are exaggerated in different parts.

You are definitely right, thanks. I also think that #version might be useful, as well as tweaking the precisions values since they are exaggerated in different parts.
Swordfish90 commented 2015-01-28 11:12:19 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Sorry, I had to revert the merge because it breaks on non ES system. I'm pushing a patch in unstable with an #ifdef to check the platform. Please test it, let me know if it works and I'll merge it back in master.

Sorry, I had to revert the merge because it breaks on non ES system. I'm pushing a patch in unstable with an #ifdef to check the platform. Please test it, let me know if it works and I'll merge it back in master.
Swordfish90 commented 2015-01-28 11:21:19 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Ok. The new patch is in https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term/tree/unstable .

Ok. The new patch is in https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term/tree/unstable .
theridane commented 2015-01-28 11:23:58 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Thanks, I'll test it when I get the chance (around 2100 UTC).

Thanks, I'll test it when I get the chance (around 2100 UTC).
theridane commented 2015-01-28 19:35:28 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

All right, current unstable (91a2215) works for me.

All right, current unstable (91a2215) works for me.
Swordfish90 commented 2015-01-29 03:21:15 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Ok. I just merged it back to master. Hopefully this will work for everyone.

Ok. I just merged it back to master. Hopefully this will work for everyone.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No Reviewers
Labels
Clear labels
bounty
bug
duplicate
enhancement
help wanted
invalid
priority
high
priority
low
question
wontfix
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
seeseemelk
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: seeseemelk/cool-retro-term#215
No description provided.
Delete Branch "master"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?