Hii tooo aaall,
I red an topic within this forum
and I tried to ask some question
regarding an comment about:
quote:
"
BlackJack
p.s. You should stay away of the GLUT and GLU helper units. They save time and support dumbness, but if you ever want to port your engine or what ever you are going to do to DirectX you’ll be very sorry then ."
end of quote
I was unable to get to that topic again,
so I ask this way.
thanks
maxmagnus
Quite honestly, that person doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Using Glut and GLU isn’t going to make things any more complicated to port to DirectX. In fact, Direct3D has D3DX methods that not only look suspiciously like some of the GLU methods, but also are needed for standard OpenGL functionality like matrix stacks, translations, rotations, scales, projection matrix setup, etc.
I think you have mistaken the diffrence between Glut and Glu.
Yes both are helpers, but glut I think is the one helper that could cause a problem.
Look at the level’s of opengl
gl is the base library.
glu is helper library built with the base gl library.
glut is a helper library built with not only gl library but also the glu library. Some functions in the glut library if used limit what you can do, when you want to do advance features of opengl. then you have to go back and rewrite the functions that used the glut functions to glu or gl function calls.
An example would be glusphere vs. glutSolidsphere. you can not texture map a glut sphere, but you can a glu sphere.
So say later you needed to use a textured sphere, you would not only have to replace the glut sphere with glu sphere, but also add other commands required to use glu sphere. Which would mean changing code in diffent places.
[This message has been edited by nexusone (edited 07-25-2002).]