I don't think I could explain the reason why pov-script is my favorite choice so
easily to begin with and that's why I've had little trouble continuing to use it
all this time.  I used Polyray before ever seeing POV-Ray and I was just getting
used to using that, the text interfacing I mean.  First time I had ever
"raytraced" via text was in Polyray.
And since the time I started in on POV-Ray I have tried BMRT and didn't even
begin to get accustomed to it.  I think it should be kept in mind that POV has
changed considerably over the years and hasn't always been like it is now, yet
it still has a similar "language" over all that time.
Got to admit that Nathan's #$ keyword (or syntax) as a shortcut to #declare is
kind of what I think of when I hear this programmer versus 3D graphics
enthusiast debate or differing opinions.
The most certain fact to me is the understandability of the code(?).  Less
meaningful keywords and syntax is less easy to follow obviously.  Now I'm not
saying I always like writing out a whole bunch more than I might otherwise be
doing if the language were condensed further (I often use cryptic definition
names for things) but I always see this programming discussion to be about
losing sight of a followable format.  Like if every current keyword were a
letter or two instead and the syntax glued together like pieces in other
programming languages (assuming I know anything about what I'm saying) then I'd
get lost without some serious roadmap mentality to get me through it okay.
That said, I know how some people can't see what the heck POV-Ray is at all with
it's curly braces and hash marks and parenthesis so they might shy away from
trying to learn it, that's what makes it a text interface anyhow.  You almost
have to think of the visual appearance of a ASCII character-only language in
order to sort the parts out.  That is of course the usual programming technique
too I suppose, to make what's typed a visual queue.
I'm rambling on here so to sum up I'm only trying to say POV-Ray has it's niche
with the form it is written in same as any other such language.  It has always
seemed very straight-forward to me though.  I just hope it doesn't ever become a
thing where the newcomer or accustomed user is stumbling through while building
a scene.  Common sense, huh?

Bob

"Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message
news:38C7685C.5A4F3A68@pacbell.net...
|
|
| Greetings,
|
|   As we all know the language used by POV-Ray is not only easy to use
| but offers a lot of flexibility. There are often many ways to describe
| an object or attribute of an object because of the "looseness" of
| it's language.
|
|  Now many in the past have argued that it is too primitive for thier
| needs and suggest that it become more of an official programming
| language. They also suggest it should become more object oriented
| or stricter rules should be applied to the language from what it is
| now. Some say the syntax is too loose for all practical purposes.
| Some even suggest it should move to a binary format that needs to
| be compiled before being parsed (heaven forbid).
|
|  I say the one thing that attracted me to POV-Ray was the fact that
| it's text based input was both easy to learn, was intuitive from the
| beginning, and I never had to learn a programmers language to use
| the program. I like the way that you can describe something in several
| ways to achieve the same results. In my opinion this loose and very
| flexible language makes it a very powerful program to use.
|
|  What I do worry about though is the influence that the people who seek
| a more programmer like language may have for the mass of people that have
| no programming background but still enjoy using the program. It might
| be good for them in some circumstances but would it be good for everyone
| is not so cut and dried as it were.
|
|
| So the questions I have are really for the non-programmer types out there.
|
| Would you have difficulty re-learning POV-Ray if it's language format
| changed ?
|
| Would you resent it or maybe even quit using the program completely ?
|
|
|
| P.S. I am not suggesting that the POV-Team is even considering changing
|      the language at this time. I am mearly trying to find out what the
|      mainstream users of the program think about this and if they really
|      like the way the syntax is currently structured.
|
|
| --
| Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
| http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message