On Wed, 10 May 2000, Thomas Roell wrote:
> In your message of 8 May 2000 you write:
>
> > > People have very different understandings of what options B and C were
> > > in the original vote.
> >
> > Urgh! It's gotten all muddy again.
> >
> > The original distinctions were very simple:
> >
> > A) gl.h is essentially what it is today - it contains
> > definitions only for those extensions that the local
> > OpenGL supports. glext.h is #included either instead
> > of or after gl.h in applications that need it for ABI
> > reasons. There are no special #define's needed.
> >
> > B) Exactly as (A) except that you can -DGL_OGLBASE (or something)
> > and glext.h will then (and only then) be automatically #included
> > into gl.h. It follows that by NOT defining that symbol and
> > #including glext.h yourself, you can pretend that (B) is really (A).
> > glext.h probably has to #include gl.h since it needs GLfloat, etc.
> >
> > C) Same as (B) except that the meaning of the token is reversed so
> > that -DGL_OGLBASE_INCOMPATIBLE causes glext.h *NOT* to be included
> > into gl.h - as it would otherwise be.
>
> Almost. In cases B) and C), if glext.h was to be included, then gl.h
> would not declare functions prototypes for extensions supported ...
Yep. OK.
Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hti.com
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
