PDA

View Full Version : Removing Returns in a Wrapper



Draino
04-22-2002, 02:03 PM
I'm VERY new to OpenGL but my only real motive to learn is because I want to create a wrapper. I've looked at several wrappers including GLTrace which was very useful.
Could someone post source to a wrapper where they have made the return of a function null or zero. I want to play around with this in different OpenGL envirnments and see what happens.

The couple of main functions I was origionally looked at were glfogi and glfogiv. So if someone could please show me or create a wrapepr that runs through my normal OpenGL driver but nullifys selectable functions I would be very greatful for the code. Thanks

--Draino

Punkbuster
04-23-2002, 12:39 PM
Hmmmm you dont want to use this to disable fog in some games would you?

Gotcha!!! *censored* cheater!

Draino
04-23-2002, 01:21 PM
Umm...of course not. If I wanted to cheat in counterstrike (like mr. punkbuster is proposing) I dont think I'd need my own OpenGL wrapper.

Theres a million things out there to use such as OGC or SimpleGL, both wallhacks which are open source. Plus, removing fog wouldnt really help.

LordKronos
04-23-2002, 01:28 PM
Completely pathetic. I dont get why people get a kick out of cheating. Why dont you just find out who you are playing against and get someone to cut the power to their house. Then you could really give them a whoopin'. Absolutely sporting. You would be so proud of yourself.

Humus
04-23-2002, 02:23 PM
If I didn't seriously misunderstand things here he did actually explain that this was NOT what he planned to do.

DFrey
04-23-2002, 02:46 PM
Like I said yesterday in the same thread in the beginner's forum, why not simply modify glTrace? That does just about everything you already want, and would take just one new line of code to return the value you want it to return. Not that I support the use of such a wrapper for cheating. I don't, and it does look like that's what you want.

Draino
04-23-2002, 03:51 PM
DFrey, wouldn't a "pure" wrapper be more efficiant though? I guess I will try with GLTrace to test and play around but I would have to remove a lot of GLTrace stuff to improve performance and thats going into code I don't know about.

SnowKrash
04-23-2002, 05:32 PM
Umm...of course not.

I think the problem people are having is seeing any obvious alternative application to cheating, particularly as you're not interested in stats gathering but just neutering/nulling calls. Also you say that your only motivation is the wrapper in order to learn about OpenGL environments, which struck me as a bit odd. Personally I'd have thought playing around with OpenGL itself would be much more exciting, but each to their own.

If you were able to give a concrete example of what you're hoping to do with the fog functions things would be clearer - you may even get more practical suggestions as a result. It'd certainly be far more persuasive than (to paraphrase):

"Why would I write a cheat? there are already lots out there".

That fact clearly hasn't deterred other people in the past, why should it you?

Ysaneya
04-23-2002, 11:15 PM
> but I would have to remove a lot of GLTrace stuff to improve performance and thats going into code I don't know about.

Have you ever looked at GLTrace's code ? Its implementation is pretty obvious. There's nothing to know about it. The only tricky part is the initialization, which you probably won't need to modify, i suppose. There's also no performance problem with GLTrace.

Y.