Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] OpenGL
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Nicolas Cannasse <warplayer@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OpenGL

From: "Brandon J. Van Every"
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 6:32 AM

> Minor points: OpenGL is generally regarded as a cleaner, easier to
> initialize API than DirectX.  OpenGL is C, DirectX is C++.  Either of
> those is an advantage or disadvantage depending on who you're talking to
> and the circumstances.

I think you're wrong here. DirectX is not C++. DirectX is COM, and then is C
compatible. However it have C++ wrappers to ease the syntax. The main
difference I can see between OpenGL and DirectX is that DirectX is directly
including all card vendors extensions and is always up-to-date (or even in
advance) with the high-end hardware, MS is doing a lot of cooperation with
NVidia and others and is putting a lot of efforts into DirectX - very good
documentation quality , very few bugs... among either - because they
understand how much it's important to keep being THE OS for playing games
(and, by reaction, developping games...). DirectX let you also play a lot
with cards capabilities, so you can tune better your code for some specific
cards. On the other hand, OpenGL is a more abstract layer, made for a
general-usage of 3D, that does implements card extensions - such as shaders,
which are main stream now - as extensions of itself. The community process
of OpenGL have not been enough reactive in order to keep up with DirectX (as
you said : where's 2.0 ?).

Nicolas Cannasse

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: