Nathan Kopp wrote:
> 
> > Also, PovRay *needs* an accessible api (I realize that this
> > would be difficult to implement in a portable way)
> 
> The current philosophy of POV is to transfer all scene data to the rendering
> engine via the scene definition language.  There are both pros and cons to
> this approach.  You will need to back up your claim (and address a number of
> important issues) before you can convince everyone that POV *needs* an
> accessible API.

as i wrote in an article above: why not both solutions?
the scene-file for the artists, and the api for other programs. why not
let the scene-file parser simply call the api. the code can be more
modular and clearer.

the cross-platform thing:
well on systems like msdos (and other systems supported by pov?) you
cannot make dynamic linked shared libaries. but if someone on these
platforms *really* needs the api: static linking is not a good solution,
but it is a solution!

cu stefan
-- 
"All my friends and I are crazy.  That's the only thing that keeps us
sane."

Post a reply to this message