Jump to content
  • Advertisement


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


D3DX == GLUT || D3DX != GLUT

This topic is 5283 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Hey all, Im just starting to learn Direct3D and i was glancing through some tutorials, and wondering if these function calls to D3DX stuff is like making function calls to glut stuff in opengl, because i know that glut is slow, and not very good for games. Just want to start off on the right foot, and not learn stuff that wont help me in the future. Thanks! Hed

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope. Direct3DX has:

1) Not the same features as GLUT, where you can create windows etc., D3DX is more for graphics operations. For example, loading meshes, drawing lines or even drawing sprites. It also includes maths functions, also for graphics use.

2) It is optimized using ASM and people actually get paid for optimizing it. Now and then, Microsoft also releases an update package (2003 summer update, 2004 summer update coming..), to increase speed or add new features to it (and of course the rest of the SDK).

So Direct3DX != GLUT && Direct3DX-999999999999999 > GLUT+999999999999999. Well, not completely true. They are used for different operations.

Maybe you meant GLU?

You're Welcome,
Rick Wong
- Google | Google for GameDev.net | GameDev.net's DirectX FAQ. (not as cool as the Graphics and Theory FAQ)

[edited by - Pipo DeClown on June 1, 2004 10:46:37 AM]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
D3DX is simply a useful library that simplifies many D3D functions, and encapsulates common tasks such as Meshes, Shader compilation, Matrix / Vector / Quaternion math, Sprites, and font rendering.

You can choose to use each component, or you can choose not to.

For example, I use the math and font libraries, because I see no point in reinventing the wheel right now (well, I derive from their functions, so that I can always put in my own implementations if I need to later), and the functions they have are very well written and highly optimized (just try using D3DXMATRIXA16 vs. your every day ordinary matrix handling routines and you''ll see what I mean).

I don''t use the Mesh classes, because I feel that they lack some of the functionality I want, and I don''t use the effects framework because I think it''ll cause portability issues later in development (though it''s a great way to approach Shaders, and I''m thinking of a similar custom approach myself).

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!