PDA

View Full Version : Why do most common extensions require OpenGL 1.1 and not OpenGL 1.0?



BingoBingo
02-11-2018, 11:28 AM
Bit of a theoretical question, but take a look at the following:

https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenGL/extensions/KHR/KHR_debug.txt
https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenGL/extensions/ARB/ARB_framebuffer_sRGB.txt
https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenGL/extensions/EXT/EXT_texture_compression_s3tc.txt

and many other similar ones.

What is the reasoning behind them needing OpenGL 1.1 instead of just OpenGL 1.0 as a requirement?

I can't see any fundamental changes between 1.0 and 1.1 that would stop them from working.

Any ideas, or is it just because 1.0 came out years earlier?

GClements
02-11-2018, 12:16 PM
What is the reasoning behind them needing OpenGL 1.1 instead of just OpenGL 1.0 as a requirement?

I can't see any fundamental changes between 1.0 and 1.1 that would stop them from working.

Any ideas, or is it just because 1.0 came out years earlier?
Texture objects was the main one, which is likely to be relevant to framebuffer_sRGB and texture_compression_s3tc.

Other than that, it may be related to the fact that OpenGL 1.0 no longer exists "in the wild", i.e. you'd have to go to some lengths to find a working system which supports OpenGL 1.0 but not 1.1. OpenGL 1.1 has been supported by every version of Windows for the last couple of decades, with support for later versions being dependent upon the video driver.