Aurora Graphics Library Initial Design Discussion

[Adam Wilson]

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.

-- 
Adam Wilson
GitHub/IRC: LightBender
Aurora Project Coordinator