This is a pointless discussion, its been hashed out several years ago
when the feature was introduced, the solution we have is the best we
could come up with - THERE ISN'T AN EASY SOLUTION.
On 5/31/07, Jean-Sébastien Guay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Robert,
> Checking the extension isn't good enough a test, as OpenGL 2.0 needn't
> support this extension, and it doesn't tell us whether its actually
> hardware accelerated, it just is this available.
It's my understanding that the extension is defined by definition if
the driver is OpenGL 2.0 compliant. That means that if the extension
string is defined, either the driver is OpenGL 2.0 compliant OR the
extension is supported separately. The OpenGL 2.0 spec states in
section J.2 Promoting Extensions to Core Features:
"GL implementations of such later revisions should continue to export the name
strings of promoted extensions in the EXTENSIONS string [...]"
As to hardware acceleration, there must be a sure-fire way of ensuring
that using an OpenGL 2.0 feature will not turn the driver to software
mode... Plus, the osgFX::Scribe effect assumes that if the driver
reports OpenGL 1.1, then it supports polygon offsets, surely the same
logic holds for OpenGL 2.0 and NPOT? Drivers that are "compliant-ish"
(a friend's term :-) ) should be the exception, not the norm...
J-S
--
______________________________________________________
Jean-Sebastien Guay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://whitestar02.webhop.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users@openscenegraph.net
http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users
http://www.openscenegraph.org/
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users@openscenegraph.net
http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users
http://www.openscenegraph.org/
