Object Oriented OpenGL!

OpenGL
1

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.

Thankx

2

'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.

3

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

4

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.

5

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.

6

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…

7

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.

8

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).]

9

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.