Warp schrieb:
>> Maybe because they actually /do/ render identically, provided you 
>> specify "#version 3.6" to enforce backward compatibility?
> 
>   That didn't really answer my question.

Of course it didn't - if the question is based on false observations and 
therefore moot, what point would there be in answering it?

That is, unless you are asking why the behavior is different when a 
#version statement is /not/ present. But in that case, there's no reason 
to favor compatibility over correctness: 3.6 default gamma handling was 
simply wrong (because it wasn't any gamma handling at all, thereby 
producing linear output where other software commonly expects 
gamma-precorrected files).

Post a reply to this message