News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on If you were involved in the OpenGL ES specification, you are an idiot. Parent comment

Re:If you were involved in the OpenGL ES specification, you ... by msbarnett on Wednesday June 20, 2012 @06:18PM (#4139419)
X11, not backwards compatible with X10 or X9.

OpenGL 4.2, backwards compatible to OpenGL 1.0 (1992)

OpenGL ES, not backwards compatible with OpenGL.

There's an obvious parallel here of APIs being compatible within themselves but not across boundaries between major architectural revisions intended to throw out cruft and target new environments.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:If you were involved in the OpenGL ES specification, you ... by cpeterso on Wednesday June 20, 2012 @09:18PM (#4140029)
> X11, not backwards compatible with X10 or X9.

That's why it's called X11 and not X10 ES.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:If you were involved in the OpenGL ES specification, you ... by msbarnett on Wednesday June 20, 2012 @10:23PM (#4140189)
This line of reasoning is utterly absurd. They are different APIs with different names. The specifics of the substrings they have in common and the format of the substrings that differ is utterly irrelevant.

OpenCL is a different API from OpenAL, Cocos-2d is an API for an entirely different language than Cocos-2d-x, the Cocoa API is wildly incompatible with Cocoa Touch. Horrors!

You determine whether or not two APIs are compatible (or even striving to be the same kind of API) by reading the documentation, not by applying stupid heuristics to common substrings in their names.

[ Parent | on HN ]