On 10/28/06, Sven Panne
In a nutshell: I understand the desire to make things slighty more typesafe, but I don't think that exclusively providing the proposed functions would be a good tradeoff for "real" programs. The things you've mentioned can easily be implemented on top of the current binding. A question would be: Should utility functions like the ones you've mentioned be included in the Haskell binding, too? And if yes, what would be their exact types? What do other people on this list think?
I agree. I think HOpenGL should be a fairly straight wrapper on top of OpenGL. For several reasons, one of them being that people are familiar with OpenGL and shouldn't have to unlearn all of that just to use the Haskel binding. If the wrapper is light weight then the original OpenGL reference manual can be enough documentation, if there's too much stuff stacked on top of OpenGL then we need new manuals. If someone wants to write their own Haskell based renderer, then please do and let us know where to find it, but IMO it's definately a good idea to expose the "straight" wrapper (that way everyone could write their own renderer the way they want it). I'd much rather effort is spent trying to support some of the newer features of OpenGL (shaders!), as that is kind of a deal-breaker for me. /S -- Sebastian Sylvan +46(0)736-818655 UIN: 44640862