Re: Question to the future

For some reason this post has been deleted.

PLEASE DON'T DO THAT, if it is not spam
since I (and others) use email to read & reply to forum posts.

So here is my already written reply :)

On 02/01/2013 09:03 PM, adi [via jogamp] wrote: Pls have a look at RedSquareES2, GearsES2 demo etc,
you will notice they use PMVMatrix and GLArrayData* utilities helping w/
matrix and VBO instances
in case you don't like to write your own tools.

http://jogamp.org/git/?p=jogl.git;a=blob;f=src/test/com/jogamp/opengl/test/junit/jogl/demos/es2/RedSquareES2.java;hb=HEAD

In short: This problem is already solved.

To be most compatible, base your 'engine' on GL2ES2,
see http://jogamp.org/jogl/doc/Overview-OpenGL-Evolution-And-JOGL.html.
You may also add specialized implementations using e.g. GL3 or GL4,
if the passed GL object is compatible, i.e. gl.isGL3().

+++

Further: We also have a (not 100% working) fixed function pipeline emulation,
which is also demonstrated in Jake2,
which runs the ES1 Jake2 code on ES2.
  http://jogamp.org/git/?p=users/sgothel/jake2.git;a=summary

~Sven

Hmm, Java3D's fixed-function needs aren't that huge, I wonder how well the fixed function emulation
would work there. (idlethought)

Harvey

I use #420 core in the shader.
It is a bunch of work to do that.
Must writing my own math lib,
kick off all deprecated fixed funtions, and so on.

On 02/05/2013 05:07 PM, adi [via jogamp] wrote:
> I use #420 core in the shader.
> It is a bunch of work to do that.
> Must writing my own math lib,
> kick off all deprecated fixed funtions, and so on.

If PMVMatrix and/or our other math utils are not sufficient
even though they replace fixed function pipeline matrix math,
yes - you might need to have your own.

Note: Above mentioned math utils already exist.

~Sven

There are already several engines that uses several renderers depending on what is supported by OpenGL(-ES), for example JMonkeyEngine.