OpenGL 3 Updates

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob Barris

As work is already underway for the next release, this is exactly the right time to bring up functionality that you want either as an OpenGL 3.0 extension or for the next core release. (Index buffer offsetting is on that list already)

---

(yay! replying to the same thing twice).

Honestly Rob, give us a reason to bother/care?
Because the last time we were asked we were presented with OpenGL3.0 which was accepted as the best thing to happen to OpenGL, got praise left, right and center and generally became a "DO WANT!" from the community.

Then, 2 years later, you turn around and drop all these plans because the CAD and related industries don't want it and have the cheek to turn around to us and say 'hey guys.. what do you want?'.

We told you, you gave us this.
If you want to know what people want in the future go ask those CAD people who made us end up with this because it's obvious at this point that what the general community wants doesn't matter and, in some regards, never did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cass

We are approaching the end of the road with the conventional API models now though. On at least one next generation platform, software developers will be able to write their own GL and make it as small and efficient as they like.

---

I understand you're speaking about unspecified near future, but I'd like to look at it from the point of view of tools available today: Cuda/CTM. I think there is still a lot of GPU functionality of not covered by either of these GPGPU APIs:

- blend, stencil and depth test/ops
- early/hierarchical depth culling
- optimization of pixel pipeline by running it's components at different frequencies: per-sample, per-pixel and per-quad.

Obviously, everything is doable in software, but I guess stuff like ROP units are 100% fixed-function hardware till today for a reason. Unless something changes in either HW (every GPU becomes Larrabee-like) or GPGPU APIs (expose stuff above), home-made rasterisation API won't be even an option.

By the way, I think we shouldn't focus our anger at the only ARB member who bothered to keep (limited, but better than none) contact with the community. ARB is group body, and certainly there are members there who wanted to deliver what we all hoped for. They have lost, and we are fucked. I'm being calm about this fiasco only because I already did my share of beating dead horse in GL 2.0 times.

woot! OGL 3.0 is out!

http://www.opengl.org/registry/doc/g...0.20080811.pdf
http://www.khronos.org/news/press/releas...generations_of/

You might want to read back a few pages santyhamer; I suggest getting your ragepants on...

Is it possible to get a list of the companies that voted against the rewrite for the 3.0 release? Just to correctly focus anger at, and for some other reasons...

It is a pretty sad day. :sorrow:

It also means that the Khronos group should be ashamed at themselves.

There is no logical reason for naming it OpenGL 3.0 instead of 2.2/3/45/6/7/8/9.

Why do I get the feeling that the reason behind the huge delay was the infighting, and in the end, the only winners out of this whole process is the CAD industry, which apparently knows what is best for the future of openGL?

The Khronos group should resign after this folly.
They have not shown ANY leadership, and only ended up pissing off the entire openGL community.

Nice one guys!
:sick:

This is [censored] horse [censored]. We wait for 2 years for nothing?

Thanks CAD people for screwing us over because your so damn lazy to update your piece of junk software. Man it seems the only way to go about anything now is the Microsoft way, so Microsoft wins yet again. I see why no games are developed in OpenGL now.

When will we ever get a real pure OpenGL 3.0 instead of this junk.

Hopefully I can find something on the web for getting Qt4 with Direct3D 10 or i'mma just give up on GameDev all together.

There is a new thread started here as this one is getting a bit long and is not on topic anymore since the release:

http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boa...193#Post243193

Please calm down. I really understand CAD-like companies. Making new API with no backward compatibility would brake it all.
It would be easier for them to go to DX10 now instead of waiting for and implementing OpenGL3.0.

Microsoft can afford to make clean cut in DX versions. They dont care of legacy SW. Games are written against particular DX version.
Professional applications are different. They evolve at much slower pace. If you are writing small apps or games, go to DX.

I am developing OpenGL apps for more then 10 years, started on SGI. We have lot of OpenGL apps and it is absolutely impossible to port them all to new API in reasonable time.

What is very important in the whole 3.0 spec is the chapter E.1
This is what we are all waiting for. This is what tells me what features we have to avoid to be ready for API change.

I am pretty sure that in near future the drivers will check the parameter WGL_CONTEXT_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_ARB to wglCreateContextAttribsARB and all the OpenGL will run on different drivers (hopefully less buggy).

Be reasonable. Miracles don't happen.

/Marek