Re: full OpenGL vs OpenGL-ES

[Jon S. <jon...@gm...>]

On 5/15/05, Adam Jackson <aj...@nw...> wrote:
> On Saturday 14 May 2005 10:45, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > Our egl extension is supposed to expose the full OpenGL
> > implementation, right? For example egl Context is not exposing the
> > full OpenGL context. Don't we need some way to  turn on full OpenGL
> > support and then add all of the defines needed?
>=20
> I don't see why we would need that.  The state machine nature of GL shoul=
d
> mean that if you only modify a subset of the state then you don't have to
> worry about the bits you don't change.
>=20
> It may be useful to export an EGL extension to indicate that the GL under=
neath
> it is full OpenGL and not the embedded subset, but that extension shouldn=
't
> need any new entrypoints I don't think.

How go you create a context with options that are supported in full GL
from our EGL implementation? There are a bunch of context creation
options that aren't in EGL.

--=20
Jon Smirl
jon...@gm...