Part of the Khronos Group
OpenGL.org

The Industry's Foundation for High Performance Graphics

from games to virtual reality, mobile phones to supercomputers

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Siggraph06

  1. #11
    Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    293

    Re: Siggraph06

    Originally posted by Overmind:
    i hope that opengl 2.x and 3.0 will start very soon
    I rather hope that OpenGL 3.0 will be released as individual extensions very soon, so it can mature to a solid standard *before* the whole thing will be made into core features. But afaik that's the plan anyway...
    Jep, but extensions to OpenGL 2.x won't help the OpenGL 3.0 Lean and Mean profile thing. So i would prefer the tripped down OpenGL 3.0 LM to be a parallel development to the standard profile version.

  2. #12
    Senior Member OpenGL Pro
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Naarn, Austria
    Posts
    1,102

    Re: Siggraph06

    Why won't they help? The old functions are not going to be removed from core anyways, and who says implementors can't layer core features on top of an extension?

    It's only a little difference in how it's specified, but there is absolutely no functional difference between an extension and a core feature.

    On the other hand, if you make it a core feature, you're stuck with it forever, you can't remove it from the core. If you make an extension, you can modify it before promoting it to a core feature, and then all you have is a deprecated extension lieing around, but the core spec is clean...

  3. #13
    Senior Member OpenGL Guru
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    3,576

    Re: Siggraph06

    Jep, but extensions to OpenGL 2.x won't help the OpenGL 3.0 Lean and Mean profile thing.
    The point of releaseing them as extensions is to make sure they work before making them into an inflexible core.

  4. #14
    Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    293

    Re: Siggraph06

    The idea i think with OpenGL 3.0 Lean and Mean is that all legacy functions get removed. So i hope that the 3.0 core will have much less functions (not functionality) than the current 2.0 core.

    Sure does an extension phase help to mature future core functions, but if they are placed in a 2.0 context i think these extensions may have to deal a lot with compatibility issues to the legacy functions. So hence my opinion that OpenGL 3.0 LM profile should run parallel to OpenGL 2.x.

  5. #15
    Senior Member OpenGL Guru
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    3,576

    Re: Siggraph06

    Sure does an extension phase help to mature future core functions, but if they are placed in a 2.0 context i think these extensions may have to deal a lot with compatibility issues to the legacy functions.
    No necessarily. You can effectively have two APIs. There might be some mechanism to wrap new-style objects in old-style object indices, but that would be about it for cross-talk between them.

  6. #16
    Senior Member OpenGL Pro
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Naarn, Austria
    Posts
    1,102

    Re: Siggraph06

    Yes, that's what I figured, too.

    You can make a new API that you can use exclusively, or you can create objects with the new API and use them in the old API through "wrapper objects", but you can't use old objects in the new API.

    So the new API stays clean, there are just a few additions to the old API to allow integration of the new API, but not the other way round.

  7. #17
    Senior Member OpenGL Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Prombaatu
    Posts
    1,386

    Re: Siggraph06

    Direct3D itself is adopting OpenGL's layered approach, to some extent. I think it's a good thing, too--a step towards some API stability. But I hope it's not at the expense of future flexibility (though I doubt that it is).

    Personally, I don't mind if even the entire API changes a bit every year or so, if it means keeping things in-line and in-time with the evolution of the hardware. Backwards compatibility is a distant second to keeping pace with (some) grace. Ultimately, as long as I can access the current hardware features, I don't really care what it looks like. Whatever makes things easier for the driver writers to make it happen. If they can structure things in OpenGL in such a way as to make revisions somewhat less arduous, that might go a long way towards expediting features, even if it means minor changes in the API from time to time (that probably wouldn't sit well with the purists ;-)). But let's face it, even a clean split is going to have to change, eventually.

  8. #18
    Senior Member OpenGL Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Prombaatu
    Posts
    1,386

    Re: Siggraph06

    but as DX9 lives now for almost 5 years i don't see a DX11 tech update being done in the not so distant future.
    Well, my feeling is that the API changes with the hardware, whatever it takes, and no matter how ugly it gets; that's been D3D motto from the beginning. I see this slowing down, to some extent, but certainly not stopping. If the hardware changes sufficiently to warrant a new API, rest assured that those changes will be made.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •