Hi, GL versions and extensions only indicate functionality; they do not imply any performance improvement at all. If you are performance-constrained, the existence of an extension is not sufficient to decide to use it.
As for sure-fire performance queries, that is an unattainable goal, and has been discussed to death in the OpenGL community (search for "isfast"). The problem is performance assessment is a 'float' not a 'bool' ;-) So I agree w/ Robert. You can get the behaviour you want by always setting the texture hint. cheers -- mew Jean-Sébastien Guay wrote: > 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 -- Mike Weiblen -- Austin Texas USA -- http://mew.cx/ _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@openscenegraph.net http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
