On Thu, 14 Oct 1999, Michael I. Gold wrote:
> In case i'm confusing anyone with my stance, I feel we must have one of:
>
> a) context-dependent glGetProcAddress (can we handle remote GLX with this?)
I'm not wildly keen on this one because of the number of dumb
users who are going to screw up because of calling it before
a context has been established. However, I could live with it.
> b) context-independent glXGetProcAddress
Perhaps - It's not my favorite - but it'll do.
> c) context-dependent glXGetProcAddress
This one is my least favorite - because you have to
use glXGetProcAddress to query for glX functions too,
since those are context-independent, you now have:
Q: "Do I have to have a rendering context to
call glXGetProcAddress?"
A: "It depends on what you are asking it, for
glX functions - no, for gl functions - yes"
Uck!
> but not:
>
> d) context-independent glGetProcAddress
There seems to be a lot of dislike for this one - although it's
my personal favorite. However, in the interests of getting this
done sometime before cheap interactive holography comes along
and makes it all obsolete, I'll give in to the majority.
> Not really sure I care which one we choose anymore, as long as the burden
> on the implementation is minimized.
Indeed - just pick one!
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
