Luke Crook wrote: > The swig generated bindings of lispbuilder-opengl are a lot closer to the > C API. The cl-opengl bindings are more 'Lispy' and have a much richer > abstraction layer. I believe that that most people who use lispbuilder-sdl > & opengl use cl-opengl. The CFFI and cl-opengl projects also have the same > maintainer. > > Whereas the lispbuilder-sdl bindings are generated using SWIG, cl-opengl > has Lisp code to generate low-level bindings from the OpenGL spec files. > I'm not sure what the advantage or disadvantage is to using the spec files > apart from removing an extra dependency on SWIG when rebuilding the > bindings fron scratch.
I like the use of the spec files, if only because it's a more official source for the OpenGL definitions. (One less intermediate translation to cause problems, so to say.) I have checked some of the code behind the cl-opengl examples, and I can see that is somewhat lispier, but I don't see enough of a difference to prefer it over lispbuilder-opengl. So I'll stay with the nice single whole of lispbuilder. Kris _______________________________________________ application-builder mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/application-builder
