Official feedback on OpenGL 3.1 thread

[JoshKlint]

I agree that precompiled shaders would be nice.

I don't really have a lot of complaints. ATI's drivers are pretty good now, and shader model 4 does just about everything I want.

Just cull the old crap and make sure ATI is following the spec.

[Stephen A]

As of now the main gripes are direct state access (which is no way near as a big deal as it used to be since the fixed pipeline is bye-bye), separate texture data from filtering, interchangeability of vertex/fragment/geometry shaders (which is possible via ASM interfaces though), pre-compiling of shaders and some fine control of MSAA stuff; (for me, there is one more NV_depth_clamp);

I agree with all of your points, except for DSA. While the current DSA extension interacts with everything (and looks very difficult to implement), a core DSA spec targeting the forward-compatible GL3.2 API would be very welcome.

Noone in their right minds would rewrite their GL1.1 or even GL2.0 codepaths to use DSA. On the other hand, I don't think anyone would object to replacing the following code:

int previous;
GL.GetInteger(GetPName.Texture2D, out previous);
GL.BindTexture(TextureTarget.Texture2D, current)[
GL.TexParameter(TextureTarget.Texture2D, TextureParameterName.TextureMagFilter, TextureMagFilter.Linear);
GL.BindTexture(TextureTarget.Texture2D, previous);

with this:

GL.TexParameter(current, TextureTarget.Texture2D, TextureParameterName.TextureMagFilter, TextureMagFilter.Linear);

(The code is C# via the OpenTK bindings)

On another note, are there any plans to update the reference pages to OpenGL 3.1? They are very useful, but still left on OpenGL 2.1.

[Brolingstanz]

A nice thing would be a clean enum.spec and gl.spec so everyone can reparse into his preferred language.

No doubt this would be very cool. As the registry page suggests, XML-based versions are en route, but in the meantime we are cordially invited to exercise patience.

P.S. For those thin on patience there's a gem of a Perl script in this thread that'll get you started. All you need to do is rework the output to the flavor of choice - most everything else is in the bag.

[Y-tension]

GL3/gl.h GL3/glext.h?

[Zonkie]

Anyone knows what is the status of

glEnable/Disable(GL_AUTO_NORMAL);

It's not listed in depreciated things nor included in core specs.

Regards,
Z.

[Brolingstanz]

It's not listed because it's part of the NURBS evaluator thing, which is deprecated.

[Random]

In defense of Khronos: MicroSoft has the ability to dictate the API as it is developed by MicroSoft; Khronos has to work in co-operation with more and cannot just dictate, if they go that route, then GL will not look very attractive.

Then why is DirectX looking so attractive?

Additionally, all is not roses in DX land either: not all hardware does DX10.1 features (in fact I think all nVidia hardware does not support most DX 10.1 that is not in DX 10.0, someone correct me if I am wrong please)

Nope, you are correct there sir. Nvidia has not jumped in the 10.1 train, but why would they? DirectX 11 will be coming out this year with Vista SP2.

And as far as Khronos delivering, the GL 3.1 spec was a pleasant surprise for a lot of people in that it came out within 6 or so months of 3.0, with really useful stuff in core; (just try to get over GL 3.0 being late, ok?)

But that's the whole issue. There shouldn't be a surprise associated with this. There should be a long period of communication, dialog, and testing.

The fact of the matter is, while consensus is great, it's rarely ever reached. Compromise is the enemy of progress, and the fact of the matter is, The Khronos Group is at the whims of the people paying the money, rather than the people using their API. Microsoft has a good API because they can take all the input from everyone, but they still get the last say, and they get to decide the direction of the API.

Edit: I would just like to mention, I'm rooting for OpenGL here, really am. But unless something happens very quickly, I don't think it's going to be able to recover.

[mdriftmeyer]

Won't recover? What are you talking about? Linux and OS X feature OpenGL as their choice.

The last time I checked, Microsoft is declining in growth, not sustaining nor growing in growth.

With the expansion of OpenGL in both Linux and OS X, not to mention OpenCL [with Cocoa APIs in OS X] you can bet their will be a shot in the rear for OpenGL.

[Executor]

Why anisotropy filtering not in gl3 core?

[Ilian Dinev]

The last time I checked, Microsoft is declining in growth, not sustaining nor growing in growth

Realistically, I don't see serious people or gamers abandoning Windows, and Win7 is looking good. Can you imagine a professional or a gamer to throw away their library of software (that they use for work or entertainment), costing thousands of USD, and plunge into an OS where his tools are definitely unavailable (or have gimped-down alternatives)?
Fortunately there's virtualisation.