OpenGL application works differently on different computers - c++

Question

I sent my application for testing to several people. First tester has the same result as mine, but other twos have something strange. For some reason, image, which should be in original size at lower left corner, they see as stretched to fullscreen. Also they don't see GUI elements (however, buttons work if they are found by mouse). I will make reservation, that this isn't stretched image overlaps the buttons, I sent them version with transparent image and the buttons still aren't drawn. For GUI drawning I use Nuklear library. I will give screenshots and code that's responsible for positioning problem image. What can cause that?
[ Good behavior / Bad behavior ]
int width, height;
{
fs::path const path = fs::current_path() / "gamedata" / "images" / "logo.png";
unsigned char *const texture = stbi_load(path.u8string().c_str(), &width, &height, nullptr, STBI_rgb_alpha);
glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_RGBA, width, height, 0, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, texture);
stbi_image_free(texture);
}
...
{
float const x = -1.0f + width * 2.0f / xResolution;
float const y = -1.0f + height * 2.0f / yResolution;
float const vertices[30] = {
/* Position */ /* UV */
-1.0f, -1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f,
-1.0f, y, 0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f,
x, y, 0.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f,
-1.0f, -1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f,
x, -1.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f,
x, y, 0.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f
};
glBufferData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, 30 * sizeof(float), vertices, GL_STATIC_DRAW);
}
[ UPDATE ]
By trial and error, I realized that problem is caused by classes that are responsible for rendering the background and logo, and both of them are wrong. Separately they work as it should, but as soon as something else is added to game loop, everything breaks down.
glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT | GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT);
background.render();
glEnable(GL_BLEND);
glDepthMask(GL_FALSE);
logo.render();
nk_glfw3_render();
glDepthMask(GL_TRUE);
glDisable(GL_BLEND);
I wrote these classes myself, so most likely I missed something. Having found mistake in one, there's another, cuz they're almost identical. So far I can't determine, what exactly in these classes are wrong…
[ Background.hpp / Background.cpp ]

Answer 1

I found some errors in the posted code. In dramatic fashion, I will reveal the culprit last.
NULL used as an integer
For example,
glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, NULL); // Incorrect
The glBindTexture function accepts an integer parameter, not a pointer. Here is the correct version:
glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0); // Correct
This also applies to glBindBuffer and glBindVertexArray.
Nullary constructor is defined explicit
The explicit keyword only affects unary constructors (constructors which take one parameter). It does not affect constructors with any other number of parameters.
explicit Background() noexcept; // "explicit" does not do anything.
Background() noexcept; // Exact same declaration as above.
Constructor is incorrectly defined as noexcept
The noexcept keyword means "this function will never throw an exception". However it contains the following code which can throw:
new Shader("image")
According to the standard, this can throw a std::bad_alloc. So the noexcept annotation is incorrect. See Can the C++ `new` operator ever throw an exception in real life?
On a more practical note, the constructor reads an image from disk. This is likely to fail, and throwing an exception is a reasonable way of handling this.
The noexcept keyword is not particularly useful here. Perhaps the compiler can generate slightly less code at the call site, but this is likely to make at most an infinitesimal difference because the constructor is cold code (cold = not called often). The noexcept qualifier is mostly just useful for choosing between different generic algorithms, see What is noexcept useful for?
No error handling
Remember that stdbi_load will return NULL if an error occurs. This case is not handled.
Rule of three is violated
The Background class does not define a copy constructor or copy assignment operator even though it defines a destructor. While this is not guaranteed to make your program incorrect, it is kind of like leaving a loaded and cocked gun on the kitchen counter and hoping nobody touches it. This is called the Rule of Three and it is simple to fix. Add a deleted copy constructor and copy assignment operator.
// These three go together, either define all of them or none.
// Hence, "rule of three".
Background(const Background &) = delete;
Background &operator=(const Background &) = delete;
~Background();
See What is The Rule of Three?
Buffer is incorrectly deleted
Here is the line:
glDeleteBuffers(1, &VBO);
The short version... you should move this into Background::~Background().
The long version... when you delete the buffer, it is not removed from the VAO but the name can get reused immediately. According to the OpenGL 4.6 spec 5.1.2:
When a buffer, texture, or renderbuffer object is deleted, it is ... detached from any attachments of container objects that are bound to the current context, ...
So, because the VAO is not currently bound, deleting the VBO does not remove the VBO from the VAO (if the VAO were bound, this would be different). But, section 5.1.3:
When a buffer, texture, sampler, renderbuffer, query, or sync object is deleted, its name immediately becomes invalid (e.g. is marked unused), but the underlying object will not be deleted until it is no longer in use.
So the VBO will remain, but the name may be reused. This means that a later call to glGenBuffers might give you the same name. Then, when you call glBufferData, it overwrites the data in both your background and your logo. Or, glGenBuffers might give you a completely different buffer name. This is completely implementation-dependent, and this explains why you see different behavior on different computers.
As a rule, I would avoid calling glDeleteBuffers until I am done using the buffer. You can technically call glDeleteBuffers earlier, but it means you can get the same buffer back from glGenBuffers.