Re: compiling GL
Re: compiling GL
- Subject: Re: compiling GL
- From: magenta <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 12:15:38 -0800
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 08:43:15AM -0500, Benjamin Reed wrote:
> On Saturday, February 15, 2003, at 02:46 AM, magenta wrote:
>
> > Wait, my mistake... EXT calls are different, and don't have to be
> > retained
> > (though it's good practice to).
> >
> > I wonder why Perl's OpenGL bindings still use OpenGL 1.0-era API calls
> > though (I mean, you'd think if they were supporting vertex arrays,
> > they'd
> > be assuming at least OpenGL 1.1). That's weird. I mean, OpenGL 1.0
> > has
> > been obsolete for *ages*.
>
> The code that's doing this is:
>
> ---(snip!)---
> #ifdef GL_EXT_vertex_array
><snip>
> ---(snip!)---
>
> ...then later on down the line, inside of an "#ifdef GL_VERSION_1_1" it
> does the 1.1 version:
>
> ---(snip!)---
><snip>
> ---(snip!)---
>
> So it must, for some reason, be providing both. Maybe since it's an
> API binding, they want to enable everything if possible, including the
> GL 1.0 calls. I suppose if that's the case, I can get by just
> commenting it out. It seems strange to me, though, that there would be
> that large a difference between the 4.2 that Apple X11 is based on and
> 4.2.1.1.
I think it's an issue of Apple's own GL implementation, while in the
meantime you're using XFree's headers.
Still, I don't see the value in Perl providing the same "crappy"
extension-based API to its programs... I thought the point to a scripting
level was to keep things at least marginally high-level. :) And at this
point there's really no point in supporting OpenGL 1.0...
--
http://trikuare.cx
_______________________________________________
x11-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/x11-users
X11 for Mac OS X FAQ: http://developer.apple.com/qa/qa2001/qa1232.html
Report issues, request features, feedback: http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.