where download opengl 1.3 or higher .dll, .lib and .h 's?

[Bob]

Until now i used opengl 1.1, i want to use 1.3 + becouse of multitexturing.
Where can one download that, i would like it for borland builder, but i can
implib it from dll's too.


many thanks, Bob

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

Post by Bob
Until now i used opengl 1.1, i want to use 1.3 + becouse of multitexturing.
Where can one download that, i would like it for borland builder, but i can
implib it from dll's too.

Microsoft made an agreement with SGI back in the days of Fahrenheit,
which ensures that there will never be an OpenGL version above 1.1 for
Windows. You have to treat newer functions like extensions, getting
their addresses by wglGetProcAdress. There are some extensions loader
libraries around that might ease your burden.
The alternative would be use another operating system for development.

Philipp Klaus Krause

[fungus]

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
Microsoft made an agreement with SGI back in the days of Fahrenheit,
which ensures that there will never be an OpenGL version above 1.1 for
Windows.

You mean there will never be a .lib file higher
than 1.1 for Windows. There are plenty of OpenGL
*implementations* higher than 1.1 (mine says "1.5").

Remember, this isn't a bad thing. It would be much
worse if there were half a dozen versions of OpenGL
out there in the world and your program had to adapt
to every single one of them.

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

Post by fungus

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
Microsoft made an agreement with SGI back in the days of Fahrenheit,
which ensures that there will never be an OpenGL version above 1.1 for
Windows.

You mean there will never be a .lib file higher
than 1.1 for Windows. There are plenty of OpenGL
*implementations* higher than 1.1 (mine says "1.5").

Yes.

Post by fungus
Remember, this isn't a bad thing. It would be much
worse if there were half a dozen versions of OpenGL
out there in the world and your program had to adapt
to every single one of them.

I think it's a bad thing. It's one of the reasons why I
decided to develop on GNU/Linux instead.
It's bad for OpenGL since beginners can't just compile
the examples they find in their books. It should be as
easy as possible to learn using a new API.
It makes using GLU 1.3 impossible since it would need
OpenGL 1.2 or above. GLU is designed to rely on OpenGL
only and should not need to include OS-specific parts like
wglGetProcAdress. The OpenGL ARB even considered adding
an ARB extension with functionality equivalent to an existing
GLU function though it would not make any sense to implement it
in hardware - the only reason was that there is no GLU 1.3 on

Post by fungus
ARB_extensions_query proposal
Simple IsExtensionSupported query like the GLU 1.3 feature - except
that GLU 1.3 isn't supported by the Microsoft GLU implementation.

Just imagine what it would be like if for every library you
used you could acces only the oldest part of it's functionality
directly and had to use OS and library dependent funtions to get
function adresses to be able to use any recent functionality.
This is just placing unecessary burden on application developers.

Philipp Klaus Krause

[fungus]

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
Just imagine what it would be like if for every library you
used you could acces only the oldest part of it's functionality
directly and had to use OS and library dependent funtions to get
function adresses to be able to use any recent functionality.

The alternative is to close the door on all users who
aren't running the latest and greatest. If I develop
using XP features then I have to tell all the Windows 98
users that they must upgrade or go someplace else.

My feeling is that given this choice most of them will
go someplace else.

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
This is just placing unecessary burden on application developers.

I think it's better to place the burden on the developers
than on the users. I don't really think three or four lines
of code is really enough of a "burden" for me to not use a
feature.

Ok, maybe it makes the learning curve a bit steeper for an
OpenGL newbie, but it's only a little bit.

When you've been using OpenGL for a while it's just
background noise compared to the rest of the code.

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

Post by fungus

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
Just imagine what it would be like if for every library you
used you could acces only the oldest part of it's functionality
directly and had to use OS and library dependent funtions to get
function adresses to be able to use any recent functionality.

The alternative is to close the door on all users who
aren't running the latest and greatest. If I develop
using XP features then I have to tell all the Windows 98
users that they must upgrade or go someplace else.
My feeling is that given this choice most of them will
go someplace else.

This doesn't have to mean that they have to upgrade their Windows.
It would just mean they have to upgrade their OpenGL as they now
upgrade their DirectX, OpenAL, etc.

Philipp Klasu Krause

[JB West]

Post by fungus

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
Microsoft made an agreement with SGI back in the days of Fahrenheit,
which ensures that there will never be an OpenGL version above 1.1 for
Windows.

You mean there will never be a .lib file higher
than 1.1 for Windows. There are plenty of OpenGL
*implementations* higher than 1.1 (mine says "1.5").
Remember, this isn't a bad thing. It would be much
worse if there were half a dozen versions of OpenGL
out there in the world and your program had to adapt
to every single one of them.

? It does anyway! You never know what extension functions may be available.
A simple #ifdef is somewhat simpler than an #ifdef *and* a WglGetProcAddress
etc etc. I program in both windows and Linux; Linux uses the latter, and it
is a little simpler to implement.

Post by fungus
--
<\___/> "To err is human, to moo bovine."
/ O O \
\_____/ FTB. For email, remove my socks.

[fungus]

Post by JB West

... It would be much
worse if there were half a dozen versions of OpenGL
out there in the world and your program had to adapt
to every single one of them.

? It does anyway! You never know what extension functions may be available.

Your program only has to "adapt" if you want it to,
you're perfectly free to check for the extensions your
program needs and to abort if they're not supported.

On the contrary, let's imagine that Windows 98 shipped
with OpenGL 1.1, Windows 2000 with OpenGL 1.2 and Windows
XP with OpenGL 1.3.

Now imagine you write a program with OpenGL 1.3 using
the latest dev system and release it. I can garantee
that two weeks after product launch you'll be sat there
putting wglGetProcAddresses into the program and releasing
a patch for all those people with older versions of
Windows, ie. you'd be forced to write the exact same
OpenGL code you're writing today which runs anywhere.

Sure, I agree it's a "burden" for developers to have
to deal with the real world and all its dirt, but hey,
that's "life", as they say...it's not like it's a lot
of code!

If we accept that the burden must exist then the only
point really worth agruing is whether it's better for
the burden to be placed on the developers than on the
users. I maintain that it's better to place it on the
developers.

Sorry... :-)

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

Post by fungus
On the contrary, let's imagine that Windows 98 shipped
with OpenGL 1.1, Windows 2000 with OpenGL 1.2 and Windows
XP with OpenGL 1.3.
Now imagine you write a program with OpenGL 1.3 using
the latest dev system and release it. I can garantee
that two weeks after product launch you'll be sat there
putting wglGetProcAddresses into the program and releasing
a patch for all those people with older versions of
Windows, ie. you'd be forced to write the exact same
OpenGL code you're writing today which runs anywhere.
Sure, I agree it's a "burden" for developers to have
to deal with the real world and all its dirt, but hey,
that's "life", as they say...it's not like it's a lot
of code!
If we accept that the burden must exist then the only
point really worth agruing is whether it's better for
the burden to be placed on the developers than on the
users. I maintain that it's better to place it on the
developers.

The users have already accepted the burden of updating their DirectX
versions, their graphics drivers, their OpenAL, etc. Why shouldn't they
have to update their OpenGL, too? Programs using DirectX or OpenAL
come with the newest library version. One could ship the new
OpenGL version with programs the same way.

Philipp Klaus Krause

[fungus]

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
The users have already accepted the burden of updating
their DirectX versions

DirectX places just a much of a burden on you as OpenGL,
it's just called "capability bits" instead of "extensions".

Post by Philipp Klaus Krause
their graphics drivers, their OpenAL, etc.

Users update their graphics drivers? That's news to me...

Maybe the cutting-edge-overclocker-gamer people do
it, but not many others.

[fungus]

Post by Bob
Until now i used opengl 1.1, i want to use 1.3 + becouse of multitexturing.
Where can one download that

There's no new lib files, you have to use
glGetProcAddress() to get the address functions
you want to use.

You can get a header file with all the function
definitions here ("glext.h"):

http://oss.sgi.com/projects/ogl-sample/registry/

Post by Bob
i would like it for borland builder, but i can
implib it from dll's too.

glGetProcAddress() works on any compiler....

[Bob]

ok, thanks all


bob