Ive been doing some reading and found these quotes by a contributor on the openGL forum:
It -might- not be as gloomy as people think (hopefully not) but it appears there might be two versionings?!?.
If so why on earth dont they just say 2.2 and 3.0?
The next few months will tell i guess. I get the opinion that there's as much conjecture, confusion, rumors and hype flying around than a "windows release" at the moment. :/
This whole "Depreciation" nonsense and having two different versions of OpenGL 3.0 at the same time seems to be causing a lot of confusion here, so lets just look at it from a different angle.
The new drivers will export 3 different types of context:
1/ A 2.1 Context with extensions to add new functionality.
2/ A 3.0_Full Context that is basically the same thing as the above but with the new extensions promoted to core.
3/ A 3.0_Forward_Compatible Context which is the "Real" version 3.0 with the legacy stuff removed.
The new drivers will export 3 different types of context:
1/ A 2.1 Context with extensions to add new functionality.
2/ A 3.0_Full Context that is basically the same thing as the above but with the new extensions promoted to core.
3/ A 3.0_Forward_Compatible Context which is the "Real" version 3.0 with the legacy stuff removed.
It -might- not be as gloomy as people think (hopefully not) but it appears there might be two versionings?!?.
If so why on earth dont they just say 2.2 and 3.0?
In the future these can then be implimented as the seperate "profiles" in future versions of OpenGL.
ie. the OpenGL 3.1_Legacy profile for compatability with obsolete programs, and the OpenGL 3.1_Performance profile for everybody else.
ie. the OpenGL 3.1_Legacy profile for compatability with obsolete programs, and the OpenGL 3.1_Performance profile for everybody else.
The next few months will tell i guess. I get the opinion that there's as much conjecture, confusion, rumors and hype flying around than a "windows release" at the moment. :/