will löve 0.9.0 support canvas in all systems?

[slime]

I still don't understand how an integrated graphics card (Like the HD4000 in my MacBook Air and the HD3000 in my last one) can support dozens upon dozens of canvases and canvases up to 4096x4096, but a lot of more expensive gaming cards still can't. Is there a reason it's not somewhat standardized these days? Is it a driver problem or something to do with the chips on the boards?

Which expensive gaming cards can't?

Here's some rough stats on what systems support 0.9.0's canvases: http://feedback.wildfiregames.com/repor ... fer_object
And some stats on max image/canvas sizes: http://feedback.wildfiregames.com/repor ... XTURE_SIZE

FYI, a single 4096x4096 canvas or image is at least 64 Megabytes in VRAM. You really don't want to have more than one or two of those loaded at once...

[Jasoco]

Well, it only allows one of those giant ones. Or you can make a lot of small ones. Remember a while ago we did tests to see how many our computers could support.

As for which cards. I dunno. I just assumed it's 2013. This stuff should be standard by now. At least in newer machines. Older machines will have to live without them, but I see people all the time talking about how their new machine doesn't support them. There doesn't seem to be an easy way to tell until you use the machine and it sucks. Because canvases are so useful. And I always want to use them, but afraid people are gonna complain.

[jjmafiae]

Well, it only allows one of those giant ones. Or you can make a lot of small ones. Remember a while ago we did tests to see how many our computers could support.

As for which cards. I dunno. I just assumed it's 2013. This stuff should be standard by now. At least in newer machines. Older machines will have to live without them, but I see people all the time talking about how their new machine doesn't support them. There doesn't seem to be an easy way to tell until you use the machine and it sucks. Because canvases are so useful. And I always want to use them, but afraid people are gonna complain.

you could have canvas as an optional thing in your game (like you apply it in options or something like that)

[slime]

Well, it only allows one of those giant ones. Or you can make a lot of small ones. Remember a while ago we did tests to see how many our computers could support.

I wouldn't put too much weight on a poll which only had a handful of contributions and no one was forced to report the correct thing.

As for which cards. I dunno. I just assumed it's 2013. This stuff should be standard by now. At least in newer machines. Older machines will have to live without them, but I see people all the time talking about how their new machine doesn't support them. There doesn't seem to be an easy way to tell until you use the machine and it sucks. Because canvases are so useful. And I always want to use them, but afraid people are gonna complain.

0.9.0's (and 0.7.x') canvas support has been pretty much standard since 2005.

The only systems which don't support it are those with some old Intel GMA chips such as the 950 (although in a few cases some GMAs got support with later drivers), ATI Radeon 8xxx and below (and some 9xxx without proper drivers), nvidia GeForce4 and below (and some GeForce FX 5xxx without proper drivers), and Microsoft's software renderer. None of those are anywhere near modern.

On the mobile side, All iPhones support them - even those without support for OpenGL ES 2.0, which is so ubiquitous now that there is only a fraction of a percent of devices used which lack ES 2.0.

[substitute541]

What manufacturers went insane and thought nobody needed offscreen surfaces anymore?

Intel.

I don't think the problem was about performance, but something else. Why focus too much on OpenGL if you really want to please the Direct3D people? Of course we would have to ask intel themselves why they didn't put any effort into the OpenGL driver back then.

So this is why my Intel integrated graphics card sucks when I do some OpenGL programming while ROBLOX (a Direct3D game) works fine. *sigh*

[szensk]

Did it had a GPU? Because in software, anything is easily possible.

It used a Yamaha V9938 video chip.

But Love cannot even assume which kernel, CPU, or GPU. It'll never known which internal system architecture the GPU uses, because it target libraries which, target drivers which, in turn, target the architecture. It has no idea of memory timings or even which instructions the CPU supports. Lua is too high level to do much with that information. Love2D isn't device specific and can never be. The question becomes: if the hardware doesn't support canvases, emulate it or error out? These GPU usually support render-to-texture (LPDIRECT3DSURFACE9), but sadly Intel didn't extend that privilege to OpenGL. It's a question we shouldn't need to ask in 2013!