On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Simon Ortiz <o.si...@gmail.com> wrote: > From my ignorance, I would vote for loading only the relevant bits for > ES. Given that it's going to run in a constrained environment, less > loading is better (less memory consumption, faster loading time... > although the difference in both could be dismissible). Plus, it might > be safer. Would ugly things happen if you call a function defined in > cl-opengl that isn't in OpenGL ES 1.1?
I thing you'd simply get an undefined function error from CFFI. > I have some questions about the cl-opengl-base approach: would it > require subtracting the common bits from the spec for cl-opengl? Or > would the common bits be overwritten in cl-opengl? The former seems cleaner. > Would the cl-opengl-base approach scale nicely? Let's say we want to > add ES 2.0, do we revise cl-opengl-base so that it is the intersection > of functions in OpenGL 4.1, OpenGL ES 1.1 and OpenGL ES 2.0? Would > this also be necessary if someone wanted to add WebGL, and when a new > version of OpenGL is released? Not sure about nicely, but I suppose you could have a cl-opengl-base-1.1, cl-opengl-base-2.0, etc. If one's going to think about a layout like this in depth, it'd be interesting to take OpenGL profiles into account too. > I guess the other approach would be to have independent systems. However, we most certainly want to avoid duplication on the GL package since that package contains high-level abstractions that aren't automatically generated. > Yes, it's a shame ES doesn't have a spec file. If we take the > independent system route, we could start from the spec of OpenGL 1.5 > and remove the functions that aren't in ES 1.1. > > As Luís says, the egl* functions are few. Maybe we could also add them > by hand to the ES 1.1 spec file. I don't think adding them to the spec file is worth the trouble. Writing the CFFI definitions by hand is probably much simpler. I suggest you create a cl-opengl-es-1.1 system, make it depend on cl-opengl and add the egl functions to a new EGL package. We can then tackle the cl-opengl-base issue if it's worth the trouble. Cheers, -- Luís Oliveira http://r42.eu/~luis/ _______________________________________________ cl-opengl-devel mailing list cl-opengl-devel@common-lisp.net http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cl-opengl-devel
