This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


OpenGL OpenGL for DirectX

Recommended Posts

Hi, I have some experience with OpenGL but don''t know almost nothing about DirectX, but anyone know, or know to be impossible, or know that anyone is working on something like that, about implementing the OpenGL API on top of DirectX? Would be nice to use the same code and be able to compile OpenGL or DirectX graphics just with the switch of a library.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
That''s how the DirectX support in Tribes2/Torque works, an OGL like wrapper over Direct3D.

Their D3D implementation isn''t the best, but it shows the task is very possible.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it can be done. You can create a wrapper for Direct3D that looks like OpenGL or you can create a custom API to suit your needs and then wrap the custom API around DirectX and OpenGL.

Some thing like this

// Renderer.h - Base Renderer

class Renderer
virtual void DoSomething(void)=0;

// D3DRenderer.h - Direct3D Renderer

class D3DRenderer : public Renderer
void DoSomething(void);

// OGLRenderer.h - OpenGL Renderer

class OGLRenderer : public Renderer
void DoSomething(void);

//Then some where in your program have this

// Define what ever renderer you want to compile with

// or

#define D3D_RENDERER

#if defined(OGL_RENDERER)
#include "OGLRenderer.h"
OGLRenderer g_Renderer;
#elif defined(D3D_RENDERER)
#include "D3DRenderer.h"
D3DRenderer g_Renderer;
#error No Renderer Defined

Ok I have tried to edit the bottom part like 5 times and the source tags still keep messing it up.

[edited by - Garrland on March 4, 2003 5:09:12 PM]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Garrland: the ideia is reuse OpenGL code in DirectX only platforms, so, building a new interface is not an option, but thanks for the reply anyway.

CheeseGrater: nothing like a library or something, so I can reuse instead of reinvent? maybe the Tribes guys published something? LGPL or free for non-comercial use would be good, but anything else would help.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
If you''ve already written it in OpenGL, is there really any point in mapping that onto OpenGL? I mean, other than the Xbox, there isn''t really any machine that runs DirectX and not OpenGL.

This isn''t meant as a flame, I just wonder what your reasons for doing this are.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Bleh, I meant " is there really any point in mapping that onto DirectX?"

I can type faster than I can think. And the sad thing is, I can''t even type that fast.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Original post by svpace
CheeseGrater: nothing like a library or something, so I can reuse instead of reinvent? maybe the Tribes guys published something? LGPL or free for non-comercial use would be good, but anything else would help.

Don''t know of anything LGPL or free, but if you head to and plunk down $100 for the engine, you''ll also get the source to their D3D wrapper.

AP: Switching API''s makes the most sense when you''ve got buggy or incomplete drivers for one but not the other. This is less common now that it used to be, but some older or off-brand video cards still do a lot better with D3D than with openGL.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Similar Content

    • By DelicateTreeFrog
      Hello! As an exercise for delving into modern OpenGL, I'm creating a simple .obj renderer. I want to support things like varying degrees of specularity, geometry opacity, things like that, on a per-material basis. Different materials can also have different textures. Basic .obj necessities. I've done this in old school OpenGL, but modern OpenGL has its own thing going on, and I'd like to conform as closely to the standards as possible so as to keep the program running correctly, and I'm hoping to avoid picking up bad habits this early on.
      Reading around on the OpenGL Wiki, one tip in particular really stands out to me on this page:
      For something like a renderer for .obj files, this sort of thing seems almost ideal, but according to the wiki, it's a bad idea. Interesting to note!
      So, here's what the plan is so far as far as loading goes:
      Set up a type for materials so that materials can be created and destroyed. They will contain things like diffuse color, diffuse texture, geometry opacity, and so on, for each material in the .mtl file. Since .obj files are conveniently split up by material, I can load different groups of vertices/normals/UVs and triangles into different blocks of data for different models. When it comes to the rendering, I get a bit lost. I can either:
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUseProgram to use a different shader for that particular geometry (so a unique shader just for the material that is shared by this triangle group). or
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUniform a few times to adjust different parameters within the "master shader", such as specularity, diffuse color, and geometry opacity. In both cases, I still have to call glBindTexture between drawing triangle groups in order to bind the diffuse texture used by the material, so there doesn't seem to be a way around having the CPU do *something* during the rendering process instead of letting the GPU do everything all at once.
      The second option here seems less cluttered, however. There are less shaders to keep up with while one "master shader" handles it all. I don't have to duplicate any code or compile multiple shaders. Arguably, I could always have the shader program for each material be embedded in the material itself, and be auto-generated upon loading the material from the .mtl file. But this still leads to constantly calling glUseProgram, much more than is probably necessary in order to properly render the .obj. There seem to be a number of differing opinions on if it's okay to use hundreds of shaders or if it's best to just use tens of shaders.
      So, ultimately, what is the "right" way to do this? Does using a "master shader" (or a few variants of one) bog down the system compared to using hundreds of shader programs each dedicated to their own corresponding materials? Keeping in mind that the "master shaders" would have to track these additional uniforms and potentially have numerous branches of ifs, it may be possible that the ifs will lead to additional and unnecessary processing. But would that more expensive than constantly calling glUseProgram to switch shaders, or storing the shaders to begin with?
      With all these angles to consider, it's difficult to come to a conclusion. Both possible methods work, and both seem rather convenient for their own reasons, but which is the most performant? Please help this beginner/dummy understand. Thank you!
    • By JJCDeveloper
      I want to make professional java 3d game with server program and database,packet handling for multiplayer and client-server communicating,maps rendering,models,and stuffs Which aspect of java can I learn and where can I learn java Lwjgl OpenGL rendering Like minecraft and world of tanks
    • By AyeRonTarpas
      A friend of mine and I are making a 2D game engine as a learning experience and to hopefully build upon the experience in the long run.

      -What I'm using:
          C++;. Since im learning this language while in college and its one of the popular language to make games with why not.     Visual Studios; Im using a windows so yea.     SDL or GLFW; was thinking about SDL since i do some research on it where it is catching my interest but i hear SDL is a huge package compared to GLFW, so i may do GLFW to start with as learning since i may get overwhelmed with SDL.  
      Knowing what we want in the engine what should our main focus be in terms of learning. File managements, with headers, functions ect. How can i properly manage files with out confusing myself and my friend when sharing code. Alternative to Visual studios: My friend has a mac and cant properly use Vis studios, is there another alternative to it?  
    • By ferreiradaselva
      Both functions are available since 3.0, and I'm currently using `glMapBuffer()`, which works fine.
      But, I was wondering if anyone has experienced advantage in using `glMapBufferRange()`, which allows to specify the range of the mapped buffer. Could this be only a safety measure or does it improve performance?
      Note: I'm not asking about glBufferSubData()/glBufferData. Those two are irrelevant in this case.
    • By xhcao
      Before using void glBindImageTexture(    GLuint unit, GLuint texture, GLint level, GLboolean layered, GLint layer, GLenum access, GLenum format), does need to make sure that texture is completeness. 
  • Popular Now