I'm currently trying to get OpenVG up and running on my desktop. The problem comes here: I am / will be developing an application for a Windows CE device (with .NET compact framework), which has hardware-accelerated OpenGL ES 2.0 and OpenVG 1.0.1 (based on TI OMAP35x, if you're interested). The application will definitely use OpenVG for drawing, and likely OpenGL for some effects if OpenVG doesn't offer them (i.e. blur).
Now I'd like to develop on my desktop without the emulator (see this question). So I thought I just import OpenVG with P/Invoke, which was quite easy, since the OpenVG people made their constants into real enums, and though a procedural C API, it translated very well into an object-oriented form (with a Graphics class for drawing and Path, Paint, Stroke and Image objects). I also managed to get going with differently named DLLs and entry points. Oh, and I imported EGL 1.3, also quite easy to translate to an object-oriented API.
Until this point, it sounded quite good. I thought I'd just use the OpenVG reference implementation from Khronos, but it is slow. Really slow. You know, like clearing the surface taking literally a second! So I thought, fine, OpenVG is a standard, I'll just take one of the other implementations. Most of them are based on OpenGL, which is what I want. Or isn't it?
No, it's not. Creating an OpenGL ES 2.0 surface with EGL 1.3 (supplied with the PowerVR Windows Emulation SDK for OpenGL ES 2.0) is not compatible with any OpenVG implementation I tried. Some of them require traditional OpenGL (AmanithVG GLE), the EGL version supplied by PowerVR doesn't support OpenVG. Most implementations don't even have EGL and use some bizarre functions t