Fwd: OpenGL 1 and 2 support (was RE: Hello HOpenGL)

shit... I *ALWAYS* miss checking where i'm sending my e-mails... This
got sent directly to Sam and not to the list :/

 // Alexander "t3h winrarz" Göransson

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Alexander Göransson <[email protected]>
Date: 2011/6/16
Subject: Re: [HOpenGL] OpenGL 1 and 2 support (was RE: Hello HOpenGL)
To: Sam Martin <[email protected]>


Ok, so right now it's going to look like this:

Say that X is the new namespace for OpenGL (will probably stay as
Graphics.Rendering.OpenGL), then "Graphics.Rendering.OpenGL" will no
longer be an importable module, instead you will have to choose a
version. Provided modules (these will have sub-modules) will be

X.Core21
X.Core30
X.Core31
X.Core32
X.Core33
X.Core40
X.Core41

But Core21 and Core30 will *not* include any functions that were
removed with Core31 (the version that said bye-bye to the fixed
function pipeline). If you desire using any of those functions you can
always use either OpenGLRaw (which will also expose a bunch more Core
modules than before) or any old version of the OpenGL library. Also -
none of these modules will actually require that you have their
respective version available on your system. They will only require
that you have support for the extensions that were promoted to Core
for that module. This is good news for Mac users as well as *nix users
not using any manufacturers binary driver.

 // Alexander

On 16 June 2011 10:59, Sam Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> This was the only thing that jumped out at me in Alexander’s blog post.
>>> Also I'm against dropping OpenGL 2.0
>>> support, though that's a lesser problem if the new bindings is a
>>> different package. I don't remember getting any reply on that.
>
> Having a new package that only focuses on more recent OpenGL support (i.e. 3 or 4) could well be a good idea. Having a smaller support window would, I imagine, allow the package to be more focused. Good things for those interested in working on high end graphics.
>
> However, I’m definitely not in favour of seeing dropping OpenGL 1 or 2 support disappear entirely. These APIs will be significant for a number of years to come, particularly on mobile devices.
>
> I’m not totally sure if this is what is on the cards though. Can anyone clarify?
>
> Thanks,
> Sam
>
> _______________________________________________
> HOpenGL mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hopengl
>