I downloaded DevC++, OpenGL2, and GLUT and I am very disappointed. So far I have hardly been able to complile ANYTHING. None of the Glut or ogl examples will work. Even the "Hello-world" program that comes with DevC++ wouldnt compile!
I don''t have the money for VC++ and im a complete dumbass. What am i going to do!?!?!??!!
At least the DX examples compile, and I think you summed it up pretty well in the last paragraph lol
Michael BartmanDark Omen StudiosLead Engine Programmer
I would suggest you to use the free borland commandline tools instead. It has the best ANSI compliance and it is the same compiler that is used in the full commercial package. Why free then? well you don''t get an IDE it is just text based so you will have to do some more work on your part but it is well worth it. Especially since the install file is only 8 mb. It is a no nonsense compiler. Then you can program using notepad if you want. Just make sure you read the manual though.
As for DX it is true that DX has passed OpenGL as far as features is concerned but this will be adressed with OpenGL 2.0 which will place it ahead again. As far as performance is concerned I can tell you this. nVidia (I don''t know about ATI) has the OpenGL functions hardcoded on the board. This is not the case with DirectX so you think which is faster?? Well, actually it is not that much faster. The difference can hardly be measured and it differs between cards too. As for support, I assume most people use windows. For this reason I also assume all windows users have DirectX drivers. I am sure, however, that not all cards have OpenGL support. Some ATI cards comes to mind.
Yes, DirectX is quite difficult to learn. It is poorly documented, and it changes it appearance with every release. Making it even harder to follow. Nowadays, it is easier to learn but in no ways as easy as OpenGL. But its constant changes reveal the truth of an ill designed and thought out API. Which is the main reason for the constant version releases of DirectX. MS is struggling hard to find a concept as good as OpenGL or better but the more they try the more like OpenGL it looks. Which leads to the old statement (Carmack) that it would be better if DirectX was forgotten about and everyone used OpenGL instead. I tend to agree on this point. However, that was a long time ago and even Carmack agrees today that there is little difference between DX and OpenGL; And that it is much more justified to use DX today than before.
I wrote an API of myself to help my students learn programming easier and allow them to use ansi c/c++ instead of windows programming (beginners class) to make it easier to start out. However, like DX it wasn''t very thought out in the beginning and so it became laden witch functions that mre or less resembled each other. I am writing a new API version to mend this situation (just as MS is doing with DX all the time) so I have full understanding on how difficult it is to create a good API. I don''t have understanding though for the poor documentation. MS is a large company and should (in my view) be able to afford creating a proper manual that is more beginner oriented. Not just some poorly documented function listing.
