3 ms·
OpenGL 1.1 ? I didn't know we were in the early 2000.
by Davidbrcz 11y ago
OpenGL 1.1 ? I didn't know we were in the early 2000.
- Fjolsvith 11y agoHey, you didn't pay anything for the book, right?
- Davidbrcz 11y agoHow is that relevant ? I don't know anything about computer graphics but I know for sure that OpenGL 1.1 is outdated. How I'm supposed to know that the whole book is not outdated ? My time is precious, I won't risk spending it reading an oudated book....
- binarycrusader 11y agoHow about by reading the dates on the material? It clearly states it was initially published in August 2015. Then, by reading the chapter on "hardware and software" in the introduction, you would have the remaining explanation you desired.
- brudgers 11y agoThe author clearly states the rationales for using OpenGL 1.1. For the next two chapters, the discussion is limited to OpenGL 1.1. OpenGL 1.1 is a large API, and we will only cover a part of it. The goal is to introduce 3D graphics concepts, not to fully cover the API. A significant part of what we cover here has been removed from the most modern versions of OpenGL. However, modern OpenGL in its pure form has a very steep initial learning curve, and it is really not a good starting place for someone who is encountering 3D graphics for the first time. Some additional support is needed—if not OpenGL 1.1 then some similar framework. Since OpenGL 1.1 is still supported, at least by all desktop implementations of OpenGL, it's a reasonable place to start. Later chapters of the book are cover the much more recent WebGL.