Re: GL.BufferObjects patch request (1-liner)

Sven Panne wrote:
> OK, this would really be easy and I have no objections. But I would really 
> like to understand why withMappedBuffer is not sufficient. Could you please 
> post some code snippets plus an explanation? Leaving a buffer mapped without a 
> matching unmapping sounds a bit strange at first, but I am really willing to 
> learn and improve the buffer API.
> 

If you use a single thread for OpenGL, but want to offload resource 
loading to a worker thread, you can mapBuffer in the GL thread then send 
the pointer to a worker thread (no GL context), then queue the 
unmapBuffer in the GL thread.

withMappedBuffer locks everything into the calling thread.


> I am thinking about a new version of my OpenGL binding, which supports only 
> OpenGL 3.x features, without any deprecated API entries/constants. This would 
> be much smaller and probably a bit nicer, but at the price of losing backwards 
> compatibility. 

Nice. It would probably work fine to have a separate package for OGL3 
stuff and let people use the old one if they need compatibility.