contrast_renderer VS nanovgXC

This is true, but there is a lot more to the story. For one, WebGPU does not (yet) support mesh shaders, though it may later as an extension. For two, consider a glyph such as "o" that has two contours. Real triangulation generates a mesh that only generates triangles between the outer and inner contours, and mesh shaders aren't good at that. There are techniques (cover and stencil) that draw twice, incrementing and decrementing a winding number stored in the stencil buffer (see contrast renderer[1] for a clean modern implementation), but it does require nontrivial tracking on the CPU side, and can result in lots of draw calls to switch between the cover and stencil stages unless sophisticated batching is done.

Compute shaders avoid all these problems and work on WebGPU 1.0 today.

[1]: https://github.com/Lichtso/contrast_renderer

Thanks!

You can also checkout the "feature/ui" branch in GIT [1] to get the UI framework prototype.

[1]: https://github.com/Lichtso/contrast_renderer/tree/feature/ui

Nice work. Any plan to add GPU (opengl) support? CPU rendering is OK but the performance using the GPU is likely order of magnitudes better. Here is a library that uses the same antialiasing technique https://github.com/styluslabs/nanovgXC using OpenGL (based on NanoVG).

GPU vector graphics library I released a few years ago: https://github.com/styluslabs/nanovgXC - basically a new backend for nanovg that supports arbitrary paths. Coverage calculation (for analytic antialiasing) is explained a bit here: https://github.com/styluslabs/nanovgXC/blob/master/src/nanov...

Getting sufficient antialiasing quality for 2D graphics is difficult on GPUs. https://github.com/memononen/nanovg accomplishes this with GL2/GLES2 level hardware for most of the stuff one would want to render as part of a GUI. My project https://github.com/styluslabs/nanovgXC supports rendering arbitrary paths with exact coverage antialiasing, but requires GLES3.1 or GL4 level hardware for reasonable performance.