Gilles Tran <tra### [at] inapginrafr> wrote:
> You forgot uv-mapping which offers uv-mapping on meshes for the masses

  But it still isn't a feature exclusive to mesh2. You can use UV-mapping
with mesh as well.
  mesh2 is simply an alternative syntax to mesh, that's it.

  UV-mapping was added as a very requested new property of the internal
mesh primitive, but it's nothing exclusive to the mesh2 syntax.

>, and
> it certainly made a big difference. I'm aware that uv-mapping is somehow
> feasible with a union of triangles

  I was not comparing mesh2 with a union of triangles. I was comparing
mesh2 with mesh.
  The original claim was that mesh2 was added for greater compatibility.
No, it was added as an alternative, more efficient syntax for an
already-existing primitive: mesh.
  It's true that UV-mapping was added at the same time as this alternative
syntax, but it still isn't something exclusive to mesh2.

> Also, I wouldn't play down the smaller size advantage.

  I'm not belittling that. I'm saying it was the main reason for the mesh2
syntax.

> So, from a user's standpoint, mesh2 is
> certainly a new feature, since it allows things that were difficult or
> impossible to do without it.

  Is there something which is impossible to achieve with a mesh and which
is possible with a mesh2?

  mesh2 is a new feature, but it's a new *syntax* feature, not a new
primitive. mesh2 didn't add anything POV-Ray couldn't already do.

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Post a reply to this message