what exactly is the difference between these include files? i’ve been using just glut.h as my only GL header, but i noticed NEHE and others use glu.h, gluax.h, etc instead. what’s the benefit/difference?
Nehe uses the Win32 API rather than Glut for the window creation for most of their tutorials. glut.h will include gl.h and glu.h for you. It doesn’t use glaux.h, though. Nehe tends to only use glaux.h for the texture loading functions, which glut doesn’t have.
Glut is nice for easy window creation that is portable to other OSes. Using the Win32 isn’t portable, but it gives you more control of the window.
yup! to wrap it up
gl.h - your main file that has all the functions that start with gl*
glu.h - utility library that’s supposed to help you when coding GL. (i.e. draw objects and setup perspective stuff, etc)
glut.h - utility toolkit originally started by Mark …? (forgot last name). help you write gui stuff
glaux.h - old stuff, I wouldn’t touch… not very well supported… write your own texture loading stuff, you’ll be better off. I promise! + You can custimize them to fit your needs! and you’ll learn too… that always helps.
Go to hell with GLUT.
Better is glaux.
Also it is originaly with OpenGL
GLaux is windows only. The only thing I’d consider using it for is texture stuff, but as ngill said, you’re better off using your own texture loading routines.
If you had to write apps that compiled for both Linux and Win32, you’d probably change your mind about Glut, FoxDie.
[This message has been edited by Deiussum (edited 02-12-2001).]
I’m affraid it’s not possible,because
I don’t like Linux.I have at one time
Linux installed ,but it was
my new nightmare.
Just because you don’t like Linux doesn’t change the fact that glut is portable and glaux isn’t. I don’t care much for linux myself, but there have been times when I have needed to use it for school. It’s pretty neive to discount the benefits of glut just because YOU don’t like linux.
Dont dis linux it is the greatest operating system i have ever used.
LINUX a.k.a a programmers heven
has features that MS can only dream of. Given its hard to learn to use it but it a crap load more powerfull and stable than any MS OS
A lot of features in MS DOS/WINDOWS was stolen from LINUX/UNIX and others.
Actually, DOS came out many years for Linux ever did and MS-Dos came out a few years before Linux. If you are referring to Unix as the source from which DOS branches, than you’re correct, DOS uses a Command Line Interface. Aside from that I see no major similarities that DOS “stole”. Sorry, I just thought I’d put in my 2 cents.
That’s true. MS-DOS use concepts, but not features, of UNIX. (Which is too bad, because UNIX is far superior in many aspects.)
MS-DOS no more stole UNIX’s features than KDE or Gnome did Windows’.