Hi Robert,
Thanks for the putting up the notes, this is really useful - certainly
far more concise and usable than the actual OGL spec!
My pleasure.
Might this be possible? I guess it's all down to the nesting of the
conditional renderer tests...
Thoughts?
I admit most of what you said
Hi all,
I took some notes at the BOF which I'll probably put on the OSG wiki
soon. I expect they'll be useful to others, as they're more concise and
to-the-point than reading the spec... :-)
I put my notes here:
Hi Paul,
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Paul Martz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't see the pitchforks and torches I was expecting at the OpenGL BOF
Wednesday night, thankfully.
Perhaps the pitch forks should be at ATI and Intel's door for not
supporting OpenGL better...
And on the bright
Hi Robert,
The OpenGL 3.0 version does make it easier for us, means we can treat
it more like usual extensions to the core OSG. We'll need to think
about what happens with pure GL 3.0 contexts without backwards
compatibility.
Yes, and we also need to think about the fact that the fixed
I didn't see the pitchforks and torches I was expecting at the OpenGL BOF
Wednesday night, thankfully.
And on the bright side, the new direction for 3.0 should enable an easy port
for OSG because it's backwards-compatible. However, the number of items
listed as deprecated means there will be some
Time to start the re-write...
Src:
http://www.khronos.org/news/press/releases/khronos_releases_opengl_30_sp
ecifications_to_support_latest_generations_of/
http://www.khronos.org/news/press/releases/khronos_releases_opengl_30_s
pecifications_to_support_latest_generations_of/
See Spec @
6 matches
Mail list logo