Aurora Graphics Library Initial Design Discussion

Tofu Ninja emmons0 at purdue.edu
Sat Jan 18 23:47:56 PST 2014


On Sunday, 19 January 2014 at 07:42:26 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 21:39:14 -0800, Tofu Ninja 
> <emmons0 at purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>>> In general, it's preferable to use 2D API's for 2D graphics. 
>>> Yes, you can do 2D with OpenGL but it's significantly harder 
>>> to get it right. The most obvious example is that in 2D we 
>>> use pixels as coordinates and have no perspective to worry 
>>> about, with 3D the your coordinates have to be carefully 
>>> calculated every time the window or perspective changes.
>>
>> It seems like you have never done 2d with openGl. Doing 2d in 
>> openGl is just a simple problem of using the correct transform 
>> matrix. Using pixel coordinates for your primitives is 100% 
>> possible and easy. The only difference between opengl in 2d 
>> and opengl in 3d is the transform.
>
> You are correct, I haven't done it in a modern version of 
> OpenGL, I did it about a decade ago in DirectX and I wanted to 
> cry...
>
> That said, I am not against creating the 2D components of 
> Aurora using a 3D API. Although I do want to note that it will 
> probably be quicker to prototype using a 2D library. And I 
> don't want to rule it out it for production use either, we can 
> have more than one backend after all.

That seems reasonable.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list