Dirk Reiners wrote: > Hi Allen, > > Allen Bierbaum wrote: >> I am sure this will be controversial, but what do people think about >> making OpenGL 2.0 a requirement for OpenSG 2.0? This would allow the >> code to rely upon having the real methods defined instead of looking up >> everything by extension and it would give OpenSG 2.0 a solid set of >> expectations about what is supported by the OpenGL implementation being >> used. Hopefully this would simplify some code and allow dropping >> support for older methods of doing things in OpenGL. > > That won't work on Windows, as the Windows OpenGL headers are fixed at > 1.something and won't change. I don't really want to ship our own OpenGL > headers, having all the constants defined is bad enough already.
Is there any way to do this other then the way it is done now which effectively makes us have to write a gl extension wrapper inside OpenSG? What about using an external tool like GLEW or something else? Would this help out at all? But back to the main question, could OpenSG 2.0 require that the driver supports OpenGL 2.0 capabilities as the lowest common denominator? -Allen ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Opensg-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-core
