New OpenGL plugin - many plugins or one plugin? (Poll)

When creating graphics plugins, I have had discussions with colleagues that I needed to start with OpenGL to ensure that there is the ability to keep legacy code available. This is in-case Xojo decides to remove the current OpenGL plugin.

When creating the new plugin, there seems to be about 3 libraries that I commonly use and will be adding, such as OpenGL, GLU, and GLFW. The question is: would you prefer all libraries to be in one plugin, or have three separate plugins with one plugin for each library?

The benefits with a single plugin is that all commands would be in the same plugin, and all commands would be available in one large library and would be accessed with one parent command, such as glSS.TheMethodHere.
The benefit with three separate plugins are that the libraries would be smaller and easier to search,and there would be three different parent commands. Adding individual plugins would make it easier for Xojo programmers to use individual libraries for other programs. Parent commands may be something like glss.TheGLMethodHere, gluSS.GluMethodHere, and GLFWSS.GLFWMethodHere.

  • Plugins should have all libraries in one library
  • Plugins should have a plugin for each individual library

0 voters

What are your thoughts?

I preffer individual ones, but it also depends on other things. Like, the size of individuals vs a single one and how often they are needed together

1 Like

Here is a teaser video of the OpenGL plugin for Windows, and it has more functions than the current OpenGL plugin. OpenGL is updated to version 3.


1 Like

As a plugin vendor, you don’t want trouble, so you better link all needed libraries into one plugin DLL/dylib.


I wouldn’t waste your time with OpenGL plug-ins. It’s a deprecated technology on macOS and has been effectively replaced with more modern libraries on Windows (Vulkan).