On Friday 09 April 2004 2:45 am, Brian Hurt wrote:
> A question with respect to this subject: is it necessary to make a 1:1
> mapping of GL into Ocaml?  I'm wondering if a different approach might not
> work better.  I'm thinking specifically of Java3D, which while it is built
> on top of GL, doesn't reflect GL in it's design.  The advantage of this
> approach is that you can replace GL with other rendering libraries
> (DirectX, for example).

OpenGL is not for 3D alone, a lot of it is also 2D and some 4D. If someone 
were to create a higher level, 3D only interface from ocaml to OpenGL then I 
could not use it in my (2D) work, for example.

Also, OpenGL has a very carefully thought out design which works very well.

Moreover, as OpenGL is available on a superset of the platforms for which 
Direct3D is available, what would be the advantage in using Direct3D as a 
back end rather than OpenGL?

Cheers,
Jon.

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners