On Jan 28, 2:35 pm, Tristam MacDonald <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe I have made my point, and the atmosphere in here is at this point > overly antagonistic (for which I admit I am at least partly to blame). I > will leave it to others to draw their own conclusions, and will not myself > partake further in this particular discussion.
You've made your point wonderfully (whatever it was), and I don't mind some bit of antagonistic debate. However, I also think I've made my point, and it was that you (a bit more experienced) and me (not a complete noob), bashed each other for the better part of a week until finding some kind of common ground (by you pointing out that a single letter "A") is missing in the heaps of code trying to be fast. I think *that* is, among other things, what's wrong with OpenGL3. It was a quagmire long before 3, but 3 didn't do much to resolve that situation, in fact I think quite the opposite. I also think that no amount of design by industry comitee can ultimately resolve this miserable complexity/API solution, and I see a *really* brave new world on the horizon with OpenCL where we'll write our own rasterizers again, which won't be such complexity/API quagmires. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en.
