noclip.website VS gpuweb

I know this is definitely not what you’re talking about because it’s a website and not a book but it’s a link always worth sharing https://noclip.website/

As far as I know, yes.. Besides simple differences like register allocation, it's difficult to prove that your code behaves the same as the target if its nonmatching. It's also just really satisfying when you get a match.

When doing standard reverse engineering, you might use something like Ghidra or Hex-Rays. This is what the developer of noclip.website [1] did to reimplement a lot of Mario Galaxy code, such as enemy AI.

[1] https://noclip.website/#smg/AstroGalaxy

I don't know where to get what they used in that video, but the closest thing I could suggest is a site called "noclip" ?

You might also be interested in: https://noclip.website/ (not quake maps)

I also know https://www.halospawns.com/app used to have quake maps (dm6 at least), but can't find it now.

This isn't Ross's "Dream Software", but I find it somewhat related - at least its output. Check out noclip's website here.

https://noclip.website/#snap/1A;ShareData=AUsPn92;%5eVT:h=19... , or to hook up the first one to the second (although the system to signal between distant pokemon, which it probably uses, is mostly implemented). There are a few other instances of things that are supposed to be spawning conditionally which aren't handled yet, like extra lapras in the beach.

I'll leave an article from Pikipedia with a demonstration gif, plus a picture of the whole title screen from The Models Resource and a small comparison I made myself, using noclip.website.

People keep spreading this incredibly misleading statement, and yours is even more misleading (suggesting Apple opposed a 'GPU WASM')

By all accounts, Apple's /only/ stance was that if WebGPU used SPIR-V it would be a non-starter for them, due to ongoing legal issues between Apple and Khronos.

Apple actually proposed WebHLSL in collaboration with Microsoft, to have HLSL be the standard.

Mozilla employee's stance[0] was that SPIRV was too low level, did not fit with the goals of WebGPU portability and security, and expressed concern that Khronos may add functionality to SPIRV they cannot support in WebGPU like raytracing instructions .. 'So we'd always be on the verge of forking SPIR-V in some way.'

It was also noted by many people that even if a bytecode format was used, it would still have to be translated to the target (HLSL/DXIL, MSL, etc.) in almost the same way a text format would.

Nobody proposed a 'GPU WASM equivalent' or an alternative bytecode format.

The hard truth is that shader compilation is a fucking nightmare, people do not realize how bad it is across the different native APIs. SPIR-V is good, but it doesn't solve that - and presents other challenges if you are a web browser API. Vulkan and SPIRV are not the golden goose many make them out to be.

[0] https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/issues/847#issuecomment-642...

Yes it is still a bit new. WebGPU is not finished and is still being worked on: https://webgpu.io/

WebGPU currently doesn't support the "bindless" resource access model (see: https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/issues/380).

The "max number of sampled texture per shader stage" is a runtime device limit, and the minimal value for that seems to be 16. So texture atlasses are still a thing in WebGPU.

There's even an implementation under discussion to have the dp4a instruction added to WebGPU (https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/issues/2677)