www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - State of OpenGL bindings

reply Guilherme Vieira <n2.nitrogen gmail.com> writes:
Hi, all.

If I wanted to create an OpenGL project in D, what would be supported by
current bindings? Are the bindings out-of-date compared to the C library
versions or are they the same?

Thank you.


--=20
Atenciosamente / Sincerely,
Guilherme Pr=E1 Vieira

<http://www.linkedin.com/in/n2liquid>
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/n2liquid>
 <http://www.linkedin.com/in/n2liquid>
Nov 03 2013
next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-11-04 07:31, Guilherme Vieira wrote:

 Hi, all.

 If I wanted to create an OpenGL project in D, what would be supported by
 current bindings? Are the bindings out-of-date compared to the C library
 versions or are they the same?


I would recommend using Derelict. It contains bindings for 1.1 to 4.3, 
as far as I can see. Derelict is usually in a very good shape.

https://github.com/DerelictOrg/DerelictGL3

Use via dub: http://code.dlang.org/packages/derelict-gl3

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Nov 03 2013
parent Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:
On 11/4/2013 4:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2013-11-04 07:31, Guilherme Vieira wrote:

 Hi, all.

 If I wanted to create an OpenGL project in D, what would be supported by
 current bindings? Are the bindings out-of-date compared to the C library
 versions or are they the same?


 I would recommend using Derelict. It contains bindings for 1.1 to 4.3,
 as far as I can see. Derelict is usually in a very good shape.

 https://github.com/DerelictOrg/DerelictGL3

 Use via dub: http://code.dlang.org/packages/derelict-gl3



Re being out-of-date: DerelictGL3 has support for up to version 4.3. 
Support for 4.4 is on the TODO list.
Nov 03 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Dav1d" <d dav1d.de> writes:
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 06:31:42 UTC, Guilherme Vieira 
wrote:

 Hi, all.

 If I wanted to create an OpenGL project in D, what would be 
 supported by
 current bindings? Are the bindings out-of-date compared to the 
 C library
 versions or are they the same?

 Thank you.


You can also use "glad":

https://github.com/Dav1dde/glad

Supporting every OpenGL version/configuration you want. 
Furthermore supporting complete WGL/EGL/GLX (if you want). All 
you need is Python to generate your OpenGL  loader you want, or 
you simply take the already generated ones: 
https://github.com/Dav1dde/glad/tree/d

So far glad is used by myself, a few guys from #OpenGL (using the 
C loader) and there are also a few D users.

Why glad over Derelict? Always up to date, 100% spec conform, not 
so "fat", only generates what you need. E.g. I am using here a 
glad loader 
https://github.com/Dav1dde/BraLa/tree/master/src/d/glad/glad/gl 
with a 4.4 OpenGL core profile with only the anisotropic 
extension loaded.

There are a few things still on my todo: e.g. the open issue, or 
lazy loading, or generating debug functions or lazy loading, 
patches welcome ;).

- David
Nov 04 2013
parent reply "Kiith-Sa" <kiithsacmp gmail.com> writes:
I never felt Derelict wasn't "up to date". Also, it provides you 
with bindings to other essential libraries (e.g. SDL2, SFML, 
OpenAL, Assimp, etc.). And it's been actively maintained since 
forever, unlikely to die in the forseeable future.
Nov 04 2013
parent reply "Dav1d" <d dav1d.de> writes:
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 13:16:40 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote:

 I never felt Derelict wasn't "up to date". Also, it provides 
 you with bindings to other essential libraries (e.g. SDL2, 
 SFML, OpenAL, Assimp, etc.). And it's been actively maintained 
 since forever, unlikely to die in the forseeable future.


Derelict had some minor issues already because of manual 
bindings. But I agree that's not really a problem. But the thing 
I hate most about Derelict is, it loads everything dynamically, 
even though in lots of cases dynamic loading is inferior to 
static linking (eg glfw, glfw even recommends to link 
statically). That is a bad habit especially for newbies who dont 
even know better. Writing this from my phone now, otherwise I 
could link a little rant about dynamic loading. When there is 
interest, I will link it when I am at home.
Nov 04 2013
parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 11/4/13, Dav1d <d dav1d.de> wrote:

 But the thing I hate most about Derelict is, it loads everything dynamically


But glad does the same thing? I guess you're planning on adding static
linking to glad?
Nov 04 2013
next sibling parent "Dav1d" <d dav1d.de> writes:
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 14:30:40 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 11/4/13, Dav1d <d dav1d.de> wrote:

 But the thing I hate most about Derelict is, it loads 
 everything dynamically


 But glad does the same thing? I guess you're planning on adding 
 static
 linking to glad?


You cant link OpenGL statically, I was referring to all the other 
bindings Derelic provides.
Nov 04 2013
prev sibling parent Marco Leise <Marco.Leise gmx.de> writes:
Am Mon, 4 Nov 2013 15:30:27 +0100
schrieb Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com>:


 On 11/4/13, Dav1d <d dav1d.de> wrote:

 But the thing I hate most about Derelict is, it loads everything dynamically


 
 But glad does the same thing? I guess you're planning on adding static
 linking to glad?


OpenGL is (for the most part) just a specification. It is
usually implemented by graphics card vendors and as such
hardware dependent code that cannot be linked in statically.

I guess you _could_ statically link software implementations
like the one that is part of Mesa GL.

-- 
Marco
Nov 04 2013