×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Launches 3D Driver Project For Chrome

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the disintermediation-nation dept.

Graphics 63

CWmike writes "Google has launched a new project for Chrome that will let the browser run a wider range of 3D graphics content without downloading additional drivers. The open-source project, called ANGLE (Almost Native Graphics Layer Engine), seeks to let Chromium run WebGL content on Windows computers, wrote product manager Henry Bridge on the Chromium blog. WebGL is still-developing a cross-platform Web standard for accessing low-level 3D graphics hardware based on the OpenGL ES 2.0 API (application programming interface) that can be implemented directly in a browser without a plugin. 'ANGLE will allow Windows users to run WebGL content without having to find and install new drivers for their system,' Bridge wrote. Because ANGLE aims to use most of the OpenGL ES 2.0 API, it may help developers working on mobile and embedded devices, Bridge wrote. 'ANGLE should make it simpler to prototype these applications on Windows and also gives developers new options for deploying production versions of their code to the desktop.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

63 comments

API (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31548116)

It's an API that uses OpenGL. It isn't a driver.

Re:API (4, Insightful)

Goaway (82658) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548172)

What is, and what isn't?

WebGL is an API based on OpenGL ES 2.0, which is also an API.

The OpenGL API is usually provided by a driver. ANGLE, on the other hand, implements the OpenGL ES 2.0 API on top of Direct3D, thus eliminating the need for a driver that supplies OpenGL.

Re:API (2, Interesting)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548194)

It's rather odd to do this though, given that every current and past nVidia, ATi and Intel graphics driver that I'm aware of *does* support OpenGL. Though perhaps not ES 2.0 (they're not embedded). I'm surprised they don't just translate into desktop OpenGL calls.

Re:API (3, Informative)

jonwil (467024) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548236)

The problem is that the drivers typically installed by Windows (and that exist on many machines) dont include all the OpenGL bits that the proper vendor drivers contain, hence the need to download drivers from the ATI or NVIDIA or Intel site to get good OpenGL support.

Re:API (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548368)

a) If you install Windows from CD you won't get an OpenGL driver.

b) If you buy a machine in the shops you quite often get an immature OpenGL driver because the machines have a.graphics card which was released a couple of weeks ago.

In both cases the user has to go to NVIDIA / ATI / Intel website and download one, this requires navegating a bunch of questions about what exact model of graphics card is in the machine, which Joe Sixpack isn't going to know. On top of that, most laptop graphics drivers can't be updated with official drivers and the manufacturers don't ever provide updates.

Direct3D drivers tend to be better because a certain company oils the development process.

Re:API (1)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548428)

a) If you install Windows from CD you won't get an OpenGL driver.
If you install windows from CD you'll get graphics drivers that support no more than 640x480 in 256 colours, so that's rather a moot point... Or at least that was the case last time I checked.

Re:API (1)

akgoel (153089) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548496)

If you install Windows Vista or 7 from CD, it will recognize your graphics card and install a driver for it that was current at the time. Assuming your graphics card isn't a completely new platform, you will get full color and resolution on first install (though maybe not with up-to-date drivers).

Works on every computer I've clean installed for both Vista and 7.

Re:API (1)

Vlado (817879) | about 4 years ago | (#31556306)

It has probably been quite a while then, since you checked.

For at least Windows 7 and Windows Vista you will get support for a full resolution (and I believe color depth) that your monitor supports. At least if you have an ATI or Nvidia card. Graphic performance will be poor, but you will be able to browse your web or work with your office apps.

If I remember properly Windows XP was quite OK in that department as well (at least installs with SP2 integrated).

Re:API (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548550)

the current version of Windows (7) automatically downloads updated WHQL drivers via WIndows update at install time, if your PC is connected to the net.

If you're not connected at the time of install, you'll get driver updates along with windows updates next time an update completes successfully.

WHQL drivers are not the most current, but they usually are good enough.

Re:API (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31549780)

a) If you install Windows from CD you won't get an OpenGL driver.

Lie. Windows will install whatever driver is current for your video card at the time of the creation of the particular installation disc you are using. You may not get the latest driver, but you will get OpenGL hardware support if a driver for your video card exists on the disc.

b) If you buy a machine in the shops you quite often get an immature OpenGL driver because the machines have a.graphics card which was released a couple of weeks ago.

Sorry, but time travel does not exist. It would be impossible to put a "mature" driver from the future on those systems.

In both cases the user has to go to NVIDIA / ATI / Intel website and download one, this requires navegating a bunch of questions about what exact model of graphics card is in the machine, which Joe Sixpack isn't going to know.

Lie. Both the Microsoft Update and Nvidia site can automatically detect, download and install the appropriate driver for your video card with minimal user interaction.

On top of that, most laptop graphics drivers can't be updated with official drivers and the manufacturers don't ever provide updates.

Lie. Intel, Nvidia and ATI support laptop GPUs and have drivers readily available on their respective sites.

Re:API (1)

DaVince21 (1342819) | about 4 years ago | (#31556362)

On top of that, most laptop graphics drivers can't be updated with official drivers and the manufacturers don't ever provide updates.

Lie. Intel, Nvidia and ATI support laptop GPUs and have drivers readily available on their respective sites.

This is not *quite* a lie. In the past, I have encountered an ATI embedded graphics chip which would not work or even be detected by ANY official ATI driver whatsoever, even though the drivers would sometimes list similar compatible hardware. The only one that worked was the one provided by the extra CD-ROM I got with my laptop.

Re:API (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31550156)

In both cases the user has to go to NVIDIA / ATI / Intel website and download one, this requires navegating a bunch of questions about what exact model of graphics card is in the machine, which Joe Sixpack isn't going to know

He may not need to know:

Option 1: Manually find drivers for my NVIDIA products.
Option 2: Automatically find drivers for my NVIDIA products.
Download Drivers [nvidia.com]

Direct3D drivers tend to be better because a certain company oils the development process.

The hardware manufacturers talk to Microsoft. Microsoft talks to the hardware manufacturers. 93% of the market and a platform more open than Apple's and less fragmented than Linux gives it a very strong voice.

Re:API (1, Insightful)

SalsaDoom (14830) | more than 4 years ago | (#31550856)

At least get your facts right here...

"less fragmented than Linux"

What a load of crap. Sorry man. The kernel world isn't really fragmented if your talking about hardware. All distros pull the kernel sources from the same place and just tweak it. As far as hardware support is concerned "fragmentation" is not a problem. There is not any valid reason for hardware manufacturers not to have kernel drivers. Fragmentation in linux is an annoying myth.

Re:API (2, Insightful)

DaVince21 (1342819) | about 4 years ago | (#31556374)

There is almost no code fragmentation in Linux when it comes to drivers. Usually, there's an open driver in the kernel, and a proprietary driver provided by the hardware manufacturer, and that's it.

Re:API (2, Informative)

scdeimos (632778) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548450)

Actually, when Mozilla started implementing WebGL for Firefox last year they found a number of Intel cards don't have OpenGL drivers available for them. Users finding themselves in this position can use Mesa (software rendering) drivers instead, albeit slower. Users of Safari, which also has a WebGL implementation, won't have that issue since OSX has such good OpenGL support for Apple hardware.

Re:API (1)

Punto (100573) | more than 4 years ago | (#31550398)

the openglES api (or webGL) on a PC is also implemented on top of the regular opengl api. So it's the same kind of driver or (whatever you want to call it), except this one uses direct3d as a backend instead of opengl.

Re:API (1)

Goaway (82658) | about 4 years ago | (#31581870)

It's not so much that OpenGL ES is implemented on top of OpenGL, it's that you can just call OpenGL as usual instead of OpenGL ES, since most functions are just the exact same thing. OpenGL ES just leaves functionality out (assuming your OpenGL implementation is new enough).

Re:API (1)

DaVince21 (1342819) | about 4 years ago | (#31556334)

Sounds like the opposite of what Wine is doing (emulate Direct3D in OpenGL), which took a LONG time to do and is definitely showing a performance hit...

Besides, pretty much any driver for any modern video card out there supports OpenGL, why would they want to do this?

Re:API (1)

Goaway (82658) | about 4 years ago | (#31581894)

Besides, pretty much any driver for any modern video card out there supports OpenGL, why would they want to do this?

Maybe because they actually tried to use OpenGL and found it wouldn't work quite as smoothly as you think it does? You know, they are actually writing a browser used by a huge number of people here, they actually have some experience with these things. They're not doing this for the hell of it.

Oh. (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548118)

No additional plugin, is it? Built right in? Direct access to low level 3D graphics hardware without finding drivers?

That'll do wonders for Chrome being the fastest browser. And double the download size.

Re:Oh. (3, Informative)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548144)

Why would it double the download size? Did you RTFA? ANGLE is a translation layer that converts OpenGL calls into Direct3D calls. That is probably going to be "largeish" but it doesn't mean actually bundling drivers with Chrome itself.

The problem this solves - in many cases OpenGL drivers on Windows don't actually exist or are unusably bad. If I was feeling uncharitable, I'd say the web/html5 community seems to be doing another video tag fiasco, in trying to set another standard that ignores marketplace realities (cross platform opengl is dead). By releasing ANGLE Google is trying to make Web3D not entirely irrelevant. This is only one of the many hurdles [google.com] originally identified by the Chrome 3D graphics team.

Re:Oh. (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548212)

Interesting, sounds like the opposite of the situation non-Windows platforms have. IIRC, Wine translates Direct3D calls into OpenGL for execution via Mesa.

Re:Oh. (4, Insightful)

fuzzix (700457) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548294)

...cross platform opengl is dead...

As opposed to cross-platform DirectX which is alive and kicking.

Re:Oh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31548462)

As opposed to cross-platform DirectX which is alive and kicking

x86, PPC and ARM architectures. Seems cross-platform to me.

Re:Oh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31548516)

Cross-Architectures != Cross-Platform. Fail.

Re:Oh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31550888)

A computer architecture IS a platform, dumbass.

Re:Oh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31548528)

Thanks to wine, yes.
It may lag behind and miss a few features but it works well enough for most games (older than 3 years).

Re:Oh. (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548856)

Direct3D on OpenGL is actually a lot more mature than OpenGL on Direct3D thanks to years of development by the Wine teams. It's good enough to play a lot of modern, cutting edge games. ANGLE by contrast is still very new, it's not clear how much it supports right now.

That said, I'm not arguing that web 3D graphics should be based on Direct3D :-) I actually quite liked the Google O3D approach - define a new API that respects the platform and performance constraints of the web. Soldering OpenGL onto HTML doesn't feel like a very intuitive fit to me. Perhaps the way it'll go is Web3D ends up used primarily by NativeClient modules. Who knows.

Re:Oh. (2, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31549312)

I played with an OpenGL on Direct3D layer back in 2000. It existed because, back then, a lot of games used OpenGL but OpenGL drivers tended to be a bit worse than their Direct3D versions. I don't think the project still exists, but it's not a new idea.

I found that Serious Sam works beautifully in WINE on OS X, but only if you choose Direct3D mode. The OpenGL version seems to use the wrong winding rule, so you get transparent triangles in all of the wrong places. From this, I conclude that it must be easier to implement Direct3D on top of OpenGL than it is to implement OpenGL on top of OpenGL.

Re:Oh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31548548)

cross platform opengl is dead

If by 'dead' you mean 'not used by Windows Computer Games', then yes, perhaps you're right. Computer games invariably run on Windows only. For everything else almost remotely serious, OpenGL[ES] is the way to go.

Re:Oh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31548562)

take a pill, mate

Re:Oh. (1)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 4 years ago | (#31549166)

If you think the download size is bad on windows, try downloading the source sometime.

It is as if Google has never heard of the concept of dynamic linking, which makes it a real pleasure to build. Hmm, security update needs to change 3 lines of code, I guess I'm rebuilding qt again...

Other OS's already have OpenGL, so don't need this (3, Informative)

slashbart (316113) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548158)

From TFA

Many Windows machines can't render WebGL content because the OpenGL drivers aren't installed, even though the computer has powerful graphics hardware, Bridge wrote. Computers running OS X or Linux are fine, however, since those operating systems use OpenGL as the primary 3D API, Bridge wrote.
"ANGLE will allow Windows users to run WebGL content without having to find and install new drivers for their system," Bridge wrote.
Because ANGLE aims to use most of the OpenGL ES 2.0 API, it may help developers working on mobile and embedded devices, Bridge wrote.
"ANGLE should make it simpler to prototype these applications on Windows and also gives developers new options for deploying production versions of their code to the desktop,"

So WebGL works fine on real operating systems that already have OpenGL, and because Microsoft suffered from its not-invented-here syndrome, Windows computers typically can not do WebGL because they have no OpenGL stack. That't the driver TFA is talking about.

Re:Other OS's already have OpenGL, so don't need t (1)

julesh (229690) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548268)

because Microsoft suffered from its not-invented-here syndrome, Windows computers typically can not do WebGL because they have no OpenGL stack.

To be fair on MS, Direct3D wasn't invented there either: they bought it from another company, who had originally developed it before OpenGL was standardised. Once that was done, why would they switch to a competing product?

Re:Other OS's already have OpenGL, so don't need t (2, Informative)

Gadget_Guy (627405) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548290)

My computer has a opengl32.dll, and it has a Microsoft copyright. However, it does require the graphics card manufacturer to provide a driver for their card. I don't know which graphics card would not come with one these days. Have a look at Windows Vista and OpenGL - the facts [opengl.org].

Re:Other OS's already have OpenGL, so don't need t (3, Informative)

KibibyteBrain (1455987) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548378)

Parent is totally inaccurate. Windows supports OpenGL fine.
The issue is that Microsoft usually ships Windows with subpar distributions of graphics drivers for 3D support in general(not just OpenGL) compared to actual vendor drivers in terms of feature support beyond what you need to use basic Windows programs. Probably in some attempt to provide marginally more stable drivers historically under the assumption most users wouldn't need anything more than basic API support and everyone else would have their apps somehow manage to install/warn them to get a better driver package. This doesn't really work for WebGL, however.
Google could just have their installer get you to update your GPU driver, but overall this is probably a cleaner solution for long term support since you have about +/- 10 year support expectations for Direct3D on a GPU in a way that is far better tested than OpenGL for "last years model".

Re:Other OS's already have OpenGL, so don't need t (3, Informative)

slashbart (316113) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548470)

Historically Microsoft has pushed very hard for their own DirectX 3D api. This happened after the OpenGL standard was already common for Unix workstations and such.
So wether or not it's the card vendors or Microsoft, it's a fact that Microsoft created the non-uniformity of the 3D api world, by introducing its own non-open non-crossplatform standard.
So ofcourse one can run OpenGL on Windows, but it's not easy, not standard, and often works badly. Which is exactly what Microsoft wanted when it created DirectX. A new 3D standard, that would be used in gaming, and that would make it harder (i.e. more expensive) for applications to be crossplatform; it thereby served its purpose: continuing and extending the dominance of the Windows platform.

Re:Other OS's already have OpenGL, so don't need t (1)

kersten78 (1019452) | about 4 years ago | (#31555860)

The support of Direct3D/OpenGL isn't the issue. It's realistic to think (or hope) that someone with the capability to completely change the web might choose to use an open standard.

Re:Other OS's already have OpenGL, so don't need t (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31549012)

... Microsoft suffered from its not-invented-here syndrome

Microsoft has never ever suffered from a not-invented-here syndrome, they'll happily use/copy whatever they can get their grubby hands on. Microsoft suffers from a not-controllable-by-us syndrome. Minor, but important, distinction. Once you understand that Microsoft seeks control, all their actions become quite logical. Unethical, immoral, but logical.

MS the stalker! -Re:Other OS's already have OpenGL (1)

sowth (748135) | about 4 years ago | (#31558538)

ALERT!!! Microsoft is the psycho stalking boyfried of the computing world! Girls, never date him! You will need a restraining order in a matter of days!!!

I went out on a date with hime ONCE in 98. At first I thought he was a nice guy that just had a little quirky behavior. Crashing my window, letting malwares in, forgetting things I told him, sometimes bringing down my hole computers cause i forgots twos put the swap on a different partition, and he always would stutter alot. I was like "are you okay?" But I felt sorry for him because I thought maybe he was like...you know...a little retarded or something.

Then...i noticed he had integrated his browser into my entire os to avoid antitrust prosecution! He had this "embrace extend extingush" program. He would take a standard like java or kerberos and add incompatible stuff so when i would make stuff or try to talk to others with it, it wouldn't work with thier systems. Like totally not cool!

So then I tried dating other guys like OS/2 and Linux, but he totally found out and tried to put a stop to it with his nasty vendor lock in and stuff. I couldn't even find an isp which would let me connect without at least setting up with windows! Who does this guy think he is?

I met this cool guy called BeOS and thought we might hit it off, but the day we were supposed to go out, there was this eviction notice on his door. Apparently ole MS didn't want me dating Be either, so Be was pushed out of his job. The gaul! ARRRRGGGHHH.

He would totally like buy companies and make their stuff only work with his, so if you wanted to like do *anything*, you'd have to start dating him again. Then he started with the ultimate lock in: DRM, claiming "hollywood made me do it!" And I was like "no way! I'm never dating you again!"

So I just started dating that Linux guy because he was the only one left. ...well except for those BSD guys, which are really cool and I would like to date but they are totally high maintence and I am not up to the task these days. That microsoft guy is totally making it a pain too. I have to check all my hardware carefully to make sure they didn't only make it compatible with ms. Nasty.

In short, like stay away from microsoft. He is totally bad news! kthksby

Slashdoter profile (1)

Luzumsuz Lazim (603227) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548278)

low-level 3D graphics hardware based on the OpenGL ES 2.0 API (application programming interface)...

Since when Slashdoters are not aware what "API" means? It is a changing world....

Direct2D and DirectWrite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31548338)

Another somewhat interesting "issue" is the lack of Direct2D and DirectWrite support within Chrome in Windows. Some might know that Firefox 3.7 alpha, and IE9 has ability to use these API's and on some tests they simply beats the living crap out of Chromium.

There is open issue for lack of Direct2D and DirectWrite support in Chrome issue-tracker [google.com], I'm particularly interested how will Chrome respond to this attack.

Oh I like these browser wars, I wish they would have become earlier...

Re:Direct2D and DirectWrite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31555354)

You wish they'd have become earlier?

Oh well, guess it's better than becoming late. (As in the late Dent Arthur Dent.)

Use for this? (3, Funny)

ickleberry (864871) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548572)

Great. 3D ads, even more annoying than the flash-based ones

Re:Use for this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31549236)

At the moment I can just not install Flash. When all this shit is built into the browser, browsing will be a very ugly experience.

Re:Use for this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31549888)

You can just disable stuff / install extensions like FlashBlock (3DBlock?) to disable it. Since it is in the browser and not a plugin, it is fully controllable by user CSS and user JavaScript.

Re:Use for this? (1)

rdnetto (955205) | about 4 years ago | (#31554220)

At the moment I can just not install Flash. When all this shit is built into the browser, browsing will be a very ugly experience.

I almost never see ads. But then, I use Lynx...

Re:Use for this? (1)

HoppQ (29469) | more than 4 years ago | (#31550896)

Especially when they start optimizing for the new 3D displays that are supposed to become more mainstream in the coming years.

Sweet, 3D web (1)

stokessd (89903) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548942)

So I guess instead of punching the monkey in an old-school style, I'll have more of an opportunity to hunt him down and flack cannon the bejesus out of him, all while I'm trying to do something more important in my browser, my CPU fans going nuts will help alert me that there is a monkey fragging opportunity where I'm sure to win an iPod Touch.

Sheldon

Linux? (3, Interesting)

cavedweller96 (1549997) | more than 4 years ago | (#31548954)

Will we see linux support? I would assume so because they are using OpenGL instead of DirectX...

Re:Linux? (1)

paul248 (536459) | more than 4 years ago | (#31549340)

WebGL works on Linux. For Chromium, you need to launch:

$ chromium-bin --disable-sandbox --enable-webgl
And view some demos: http://www.khronos.org/webgl/wiki/Demo_Repository [khronos.org]

There's no point in having ANGLE on Linux, because Linux already has OpenGL support in most drivers.

Re:Linux? (1)

paul248 (536459) | more than 4 years ago | (#31549372)

Wait, sorry, that should be:

$ chromium-bin --no-sandbox --enable-webgl

Although the --no-sandbox flag seems to have no effect here. Perhaps Chromium's sandboxing doesn't support my Gentoo configuration yet.

Incorrect title and summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31549188)

(Chromium Blog):

The goal of ANGLE is to layer WebGL's subset of the OpenGL ES 2.0 API over DirectX 9.0c API calls. (...) it will enable browsers like Google Chrome to run WebGL content on Windows computers without having to rely on OpenGL drivers.

(...) On Windows, however, most graphics-intensive apps use Microsoft Direct3D APIs instead of OpenGL, so OpenGL drivers are not always available.

That's no driver.

More like "implementation of WebGL over Direct3D".

How confused can the press be by simple things is beyond my understanding..

Ok, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31549634)

but will it run Crysis?

Re:Ok, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31551890)

Please stop doing this to yourself and everyone else. Thanks.

VRML 2.0 (1)

colmore (56499) | more than 4 years ago | (#31550376)

VRML was never used. For anything. How is this going to be different? What's the application? Javascript games?

Re:VRML 2.0 (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 4 years ago | (#31555198)

VRML was never used. For anything. How is this going to be different? What's the application? Javascript games?

As much as I'd think we'd see good WebGL content, I predict the application will be "3D interactive ads".

Much like how Apple and Adobe are fighting it out, with the latter saying 93% of the websites out there need flash. Which is true, if you count non-Flash sites that run Flash ads (usually through syndication). Hell, I bet advertising agencies are trying to push Flash everywhere, explaining why what used to cost easily $10,000 to port Flash to your device, suddenly is cropping up on everything except the iPhone. Just so when you run those mobile browsers, those ads show up.

Advertising agencies will now sponsor everyone to support WebGL, for those 3D ads they want to run.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...