[Haskell-cafe] GLUT, FLGW, FLGW-b
madjestic13 at gmail.com
Fri Dec 13 21:13:36 UTC 2013
>> With GLFW-b you can use either OpenGL or OpenGLRaw, whereas GLFW depends
>> directly on OpenGL
Excuse me, Jason, I do not understand you here. What are you trying to say
On 12 December 2013 23:49, Jason Dagit <dagitj at gmail.com> wrote:
> I started using it after making the following comparison several years
> ago: http://blog.codersbase.com/posts/2011-03-17-picking-gui-library.html
> Maybe that analysis is useful to you as well? Just so you know, it's
> probably out of date by now, so you might want to double check some of my
> claims. For example, the C library for GLFW doesn't use atexit() anymore
> (which is a good thing).
> Getting back to your question: As I recall, it's better maintained,
> lighter weight, and it has better dependencies. With GLFW-b you can use
> either OpenGL or OpenGLRaw, whereas GLFW depends directly on OpenGL. The
> main drawback, for me, is that GLFW-b doesn't support fonts.
> My proposed solution to that was to make a binding to the freetype2
> library (you can find my binding on hackage/github). I never really
> finished that project. The binding should work but it's very low level. A
> few people have sent me example code they wrote to use it with OpenGL. It's
> really something I should finish :) The other cool thing about using
> freetype for fonts is that you can easily make it part of a rendering
> system that doesn't use any OS rendering libraries (eg., add font support
> to a ray-tracer).
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Vlad Lopatin <madjestic13 at gmail.com>wrote:
>> Thanks, Jason
>> What makes you prefer GLFW-b instead GLFW?
>> On 12 December 2013 19:15, Jason Dagit <dagitj at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:05 AM, Sven Panne <svenpanne at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 2013/12/12 Vlad Lopatin <madjestic13 at gmail.com>:
>>>> > I keep reading (wiki) that GLUT is a legacy package and some
>>>> libraries (e.g.
>>>> > GLFW) are meant to replace it. I also see that some of the GLUT
>>>> > functionality is based on fixed pipeline. What is the current status
>>>> > Haskell GLUT? Is it 'to stay' or something that is going to be
>>>> > at some point? Should one try replacing it with GLFW(-b) in a
>>>> project, if
>>>> > fixed pipeline is not expected to be used?
>>>> I think this really depends on your needs: GLUT was designed as a
>>>> simple cross-platform API for OpenGL demos and tutorials, perhaps even
>>>> some programs of medium complexity.
>>> I prefer GLFW-b for cross platform programs for the simple reason that
>>> on windows GLUT requires you to install a DLL and make sure it's in the
>>> I prefer GLFW-b more generally because it's more modern, fully open
>>> source, and under active development. The license for GLUT is open in
>>> practice but it's not a clean open source license. I guess most people use
>>> freeglut instead.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe