Object Oriented OpenGL!

Hi all,

I just thought why not OpenGL produce an Object Oriented Extension!

I believe that the OOP is widely supported and possible to implement in cross-platform developments.


'Cos, in terms of fast performance, it’s S----L----O----W. The more low-level and complex things are, the faster graphics can go. The more high-level and abstract things are, and the more layers between the programmer and the underlying hardware there are, the slower things are.

I use C, but I thought C++ is low level too! Assembly?

After a good compiler compiles de code, it looks almost identical if it was made using OOP or structured programing. At least at the compilers that a made it looks.

I think you missed the point of OpenGL. OpenGL is a minimalist low-level API. If you want a higher level API use something like Quesa which uses OpenGL for rendering.

Besides, writing your own OpenGL wrapper could be a useful excersize. If you inline all of the trivial calls, it won’t cost anything, but it’ll give you the framework to maybe start doing some rendering subsystem tricks later…

If have written a complete Object Oriented library for OpenGL in C++ and it is as fast as C code. Slowing down OpenGL has mainly to do with other issues like geometric complexity. By the way Silicon Graphics has an OpenGL Object-Oriented 3D Graphics library called Inventor.

You can’t really compare Inventor directly with OpenGL as Inventor has a complete set of scene management functions. It is very high level compared to OpenGL and it can’t be seen as just a “C++ wrapping of OpenGL”

[This message has been edited by Olive (edited 03-06-2001).]

I didn’t want to compare Inventor to OpenGL. I think your statement is correct. I do not think the OpenGL standard should include a OO library like Inventor. OpenGL should contain 3D algoritms that may be accelerated by a hardware vendor.