OpenGL 2.0 COM based

[santyhamer]

The next release of OpenGL should be "Component Object Model" based, in order to program it with C++, Visual Basic, Perl, etc... So, it will be "scriptable"!!!!

[Olive]

OpenGL is (and should stay) platform independent so why give it a feature that only exists under Win32? That said, I suppose it could be useful for you if someone wrote a COM wrapper over OpenGL. It shouldn't be that difficult (at least from what I know of COM interfaces).

[santyhamer]

Sorry, but COM is available with C++ ATL and Unix. Softimage XSI for IRIX and NT supports COM.

[V--man]

Not everyone uses COM. C itself is accepted as the basis.

As the previous poster said, the best would be to make a wrapper.

V-man

[Olive]

Originally posted by santyhammer:
Sorry, but COM is available with C++ ATL and Unix. Softimage XSI for IRIX and NT supports COM.

Do you have a link to a Unix/Linux/IRIX/SomethingIX COM SDK? That could really be of interest for us. I just gave a quick look at the Microsoft web site but haven't found anything (after 10 seconds of searching...)

[opla]

DirectX is COM based, and you can use it in C

[Overmind]

DirectX is COM based, but its not scriptable because its not COM-Automation based (it has no IDispatch interface).

And whats the benefit of COM without automation and script support? Don't say its object oriented because it is not (no inheritance, you can only subclass interfaces but not the implementations).

[V--man]

>>>>And whats the benefit of COM without automation and script support? Don't say its object oriented because it is not (no inheritance, you can only subclass interfaces but not the implementations).<<<

Well, that's just your opinion of what OO is, but lack of inheritance is not a sign of being non OO.

There is somewhat of a benifit for COM, but an API need not be COM based. The obvious is version maintenance. Opengl doesn't have that problem since it extends itself with new additions.

V-man

[Overmind]

An object oriented language is per definition a language that supports inheritance (only partially supported by COM, you could discuss about that) and polymorphy (definitely not supported by COM). Without these features it is not OO, only component oriented or modular.

that's just your opinion of what OO is

That's not only my opinion, every informatics professor will tell you that definition of OO. There is no "opinion" about what OO is, it is exactly defined, so you can classify every language (and library, interface, ...) uniquely into OO and not OO.

[This message has been edited by Overmind (edited 09-19-2001).]

[frogger]

see
http://www.cyberdyne-object-sys.com/oofaq2/