On Sat, 11 Sep 1999, Brian Paul wrote:
> While we're focused on Linux/OpenGL, we have the opportunity
> to spec out something useful on non-X implementations. By
> putting glGetProcAddressEXT in the GL core, it would allow
> GLUT-based programs (for example) to avoid platform-specific
> code.
>
> Unfortunately, we then have to recognize the existing situation
> on Windows with wglGetProcAddress since it seems unlikely that
> Microsoft will implement GL_EXT_get_proc_address.
Well:
#ifndef GL_EXT_get_proc_address
#ifdef WIN32
#define glGetProcAddress wglGetProcAddress
#define gluGetProcAddress wglGetProcAddress
#else
/* No extension *and* no wgl */
inline void * glGetProcAddress ( char *s ) { return 0 ; }
inline void *gluGetProcAddress ( char *s ) { return 0 ; }
#endif
#endif
> How do we make decisions on these things when there's no
> obvious, clear answer?
I think we have a choice between two approaches:
* Separate calls : Logically more tenable, clean.
* One call : More windoze compatible.
I *hate* the idea of spoiling the design for the
sake of some poor decision made in Redmond. It really
goes against the whole principles of what we are all
about here.
Since (see above) there is a good hack to make the
clean (separate call) system look like the ugly
Windoze version, I see no reason to force the uglyness
on people that don't need it.
And we can hope that someday MS will adopt this GL_EXT...
or we can just use Mesa under Windoze.
Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
Raytheon Systems Inc. (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hti.com
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
