--- Aric Cyr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A while back I had started to work on, and mostly completed, converting
> wined3d
> to using WGL instead of directly accessing glX functions. That was a few
> months
> ago, and it was a pretty big change, but not too difficult as WGL and GLX are
> very similar.
>
> However, my patch is now greatly out of date thanks to the excellent work
> progressing in wined3d. I was just interested in getting some feedback on
> whether anyone thinks this is something worth me continuing to pursue, or just
> drop it?
> As I see it, there are a few merits to having wined3d on wgl instead of glx.
> The biggest one being that all the glX code won't be duplicated in multiple
> places as it is now (dlls/opengl32 and dlls/wined3d). Along with that comes
> maintainability and consistency as all glX code would only exist in one place
> and would be shared by all, applications and wined3d alike. Work-arounds for
> the
> various glX revisions (recently discussed glx 1.2, 1.3, etc) would also be
> localized to a single dll.
>
> Of course, on the down side, we take a hit of one extra layer of indirection
> by
> going through WGL. However as WGL/glX functions are rarely called, this
> should
> be a minimal of a performance hit.
>
> All in all I think it would be worth while, but I'd still like to hear from
> others so as not to waste (a lot!) of my time.
If wines WGL implementation is fully implemented then it may be a good idea
switching to wgl, a
wgl implemenatation would also make debugging much easier because wined3d can
be run under windows
to isolate problems.
Nick Burns also started work on a wgl version of wined3d that I haven't got
around to fully
merging yet, I can send you the patch.
Oliver.
> Regards,
> Aric
>
>
>
>
___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
