# OpenGL Lock states in openGL

This topic is 2147 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

## Recommended Posts

Hello, I'm making a level editor and I came across a design doubt.

Like in UDK, I want my editor to change from fill the polygons to wireframes or to points in real time with just the press of a button, that's easy to do in openGL, the problem is that when i change to wireframes I want to be able to disable textures, color, etc.

In my implementation when the draw function of an object is called first it sets all the states it needs to (textures, color, etc) and then draws, I want to be able to lock these states so even though the draw functions calls them nothing happens, it's easy to do, I just need to cover the openGL functions with some of my own.

My questions are: is there a better way to do this? Am I falling in other things in my design about each draw functions sets up the states?

##### Share on other sites
I would say that this is a design problem by letting objects set up and draw themselves, yes.

The problem is that, unless you're doing very trivial state changes, you will have problems with that design. An object should not set up and draw itself. What you end up with is code at many different places that have to be kept in sync. For this design to work in your case, you need the wire-frame and state locking code at every place where this wire-frame and state locking must have effect. Every single place where you draw something has to be aware of it; possibly even places that are not supposed to be affected by this wire-frame and state locking mechanism so that they can revert to standard rendering if you're in the wrong state.

State management like this will explode to everywhere in your code for every non-trivial piece of state management if you let objects set up and draw themselves, because they now have to be aware of every state that directly affect them, and possibly even indirectly affect them.

Instead have a single point in your code that handles OpenGL. Instead of having object set up and draw themselves, have the object provide this single point with what is needed to draw the object (a vertex array for example) what states are required to draw it (for example a structure containing states like what shaders, colors, textures, materials, blending states and so on that describes how to draw the model). You now have a single point that can override an object's requested state for normal drawing with a basic color-less wire-frame setup when your application is in wire-frame mode. Your objects don't even have to be aware of wire-frame mode in the first place.

##### Share on other sites
I think you misunderstood ( or maybe I misunderstood your explanation, sorry =( ) part of what I wrote.

But I got your point, it is indeed a bad design choice, and what you told me is a better way to do things, but anyway i will try to explain what I wanted to do in pseudo code and compare to your design:

Renderer -> disableTextures Renderer -> disableColor Renderer -> renderWireframe Renderer -> lockTexturesState Renderer -> lockColorState //at this point the wireframes will be ready to use without color and textures, now let's see what happens in the draw function of one of my object, let's say a terrain Terrain -> enableTexture //this won't take effect because of the lock Terrain -> setTexture //the texture will be set, but it won't do anything, because the texture is disabled Terrain -> draw the mesh //which will be a wireframe //now that the terrain is drawn I can unlock the states for the other elements in my screen to draw normally, let's say GUI for example Renderer-> unlockTextures Renderer -> unlockColor GUI -> enableTextures GUI -> setTexture GUI -> draw //now everything will be draw normally 

Instead of what I did up here every object in my scene could have a function that sets the states and another function that draws the mesh, and depending of the mode I have only the renderer would know what to do, and the code would be somehting like this:

 if(state == FILL){ Renderer -> setFillMode foreach(Element in Elements){ Element -> setupState Element -> drawMesh } } else if(state == WIREFRAME){ Renderer -> setWireFrameMode foreach(Element in Elements){ Element -> drawMesh } } 

I think the last piece of pseudo code seems indeed more clean and I wouldn't need the locks, which would avoid the programmer of causing state bugs.

Thanks for the help and sorry for the long post, I want to make sure I make good design choices, so I don't have the need to make huge refactorings later.

• 10
• 12
• 10
• 10
• 11
• ### Similar Content

• Good Evening,
I want to make a 2D game which involves displaying some debug information. Especially for collision, enemy sights and so on ...
First of I was thinking about all those shapes which I need will need for debugging purposes: circles, rectangles, lines, polygons.
I am really stucked right now because of the fundamental question:
Where do I store my vertices positions for each line (object)? Currently I am not using a model matrix because I am using orthographic projection and set the final position within the VBO. That means that if I add a new line I would have to expand the "points" array and re-upload (recall glBufferData) it every time. The other method would be to use a model matrix and a fixed vbo for a line but it would be also messy to exactly create a line from (0,0) to (100,20) calculating the rotation and scale to make it fit.
If I proceed with option 1 "updating the array each frame" I was thinking of having 4 draw calls every frame for the lines vao, polygons vao and so on.
In addition to that I am planning to use some sort of ECS based architecture. So the other question would be:
Should I treat those debug objects as entities/components?
For me it would make sense to treat them as entities but that's creates a new issue with the previous array approach because it would have for example a transform and render component. A special render component for debug objects (no texture etc) ... For me the transform component is also just a matrix but how would I then define a line?
Treating them as components would'nt be a good idea in my eyes because then I would always need an entity. Well entity is just an id !? So maybe its a component?
Regards,
LifeArtist
• By QQemka
Hello. I am coding a small thingy in my spare time. All i want to achieve is to load a heightmap (as the lowest possible walking terrain), some static meshes (elements of the environment) and a dynamic character (meaning i can move, collide with heightmap/static meshes and hold a varying item in a hand ). Got a bunch of questions, or rather problems i can't find solution to myself. Nearly all are deal with graphics/gpu, not the coding part. My c++ is on high enough level.
Let's go:
Heightmap - i obviously want it to be textured, size is hardcoded to 256x256 squares. I can't have one huge texture stretched over entire terrain cause every pixel would be enormous. Thats why i decided to use 2 specified textures. First will be a tileset consisting of 16 square tiles (u v range from 0 to 0.25 for first tile and so on) and second a 256x256 buffer with 0-15 value representing index of the tile from tileset for every heigtmap square. Problem is, how do i blend the edges nicely and make some computationally cheap changes so its not obvious there are only 16 tiles? Is it possible to generate such terrain with some existing program?
Collisions - i want to use bounding sphere and aabb. But should i store them for a model or entity instance? Meaning i have 20 same trees spawned using the same tree model, but every entity got its own transformation (position, scale etc). Storing collision component per instance grats faster access + is precalculated and transformed (takes additional memory, but who cares?), so i stick with this, right? What should i do if object is dynamically rotated? The aabb is no longer aligned and calculating per vertex min/max everytime object rotates/scales is pretty expensive, right?
Drawing aabb - problem similar to above (storing aabb data per instance or model). This time in my opinion per model is enough since every instance also does not have own vertex buffer but uses the shared one (so 20 trees share reference to one tree model). So rendering aabb is about taking the model's aabb, transforming with instance matrix and voila. What about aabb vertex buffer (this is more of a cosmetic question, just curious, bumped onto it in time of writing this). Is it better to make it as 8 points and index buffer (12 lines), or only 2 vertices with min/max x/y/z and having the shaders dynamically generate 6 other vertices and draw the box? Or maybe there should be just ONE 1x1x1 cube box template moved/scaled per entity?
What if one model got a diffuse texture and a normal map, and other has only diffuse? Should i pass some bool flag to shader with that info, or just assume that my game supports only diffuse maps without fancy stuff?
There were several more but i forgot/solved them at time of writing
• By RenanRR
Hi All,
I'm reading the tutorials from learnOpengl site (nice site) and I'm having a question on the camera (https://learnopengl.com/Getting-started/Camera).
I always saw the camera being manipulated with the lookat, but in tutorial I saw the camera being changed through the MVP arrays, which do not seem to be camera, but rather the scene that changes:
#version 330 core layout (location = 0) in vec3 aPos; layout (location = 1) in vec2 aTexCoord; out vec2 TexCoord; uniform mat4 model; uniform mat4 view; uniform mat4 projection; void main() { gl_Position = projection * view * model * vec4(aPos, 1.0f); TexCoord = vec2(aTexCoord.x, aTexCoord.y); } then, the matrix manipulated:
..... glm::mat4 projection = glm::perspective(glm::radians(fov), (float)SCR_WIDTH / (float)SCR_HEIGHT, 0.1f, 100.0f); ourShader.setMat4("projection", projection); .... glm::mat4 view = glm::lookAt(cameraPos, cameraPos + cameraFront, cameraUp); ourShader.setMat4("view", view); .... model = glm::rotate(model, glm::radians(angle), glm::vec3(1.0f, 0.3f, 0.5f)); ourShader.setMat4("model", model);
So, some doubts:
- Why use it like that?
- Is it okay to manipulate the camera that way?
-in this way, are not the vertex's positions that changes instead of the camera?
- I need to pass MVP to all shaders of object in my scenes ?

What it seems, is that the camera stands still and the scenery that changes...
it's right?

Thank you

• Sampling a floating point texture where the alpha channel holds 4-bytes of packed data into the float. I don't know how to cast the raw memory to treat it as an integer so I can perform bit-shifting operations.

int rgbValue = int(textureSample.w);//4 bytes of data packed as color
// algorithm might not be correct and endianness might need switching.
vec3 extractedData = vec3(  rgbValue & 0xFF000000,  (rgbValue << 8) & 0xFF000000, (rgbValue << 16) & 0xFF000000);
extractedData /= 255.0f;

• While writing a simple renderer using OpenGL, I faced an issue with the glGetUniformLocation function. For some reason, the location is coming to be -1.
Anyone has any idea .. what should I do?