Warp wrote:
> andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> My suggestion for a 'new' language would be to have an as simple as 
>> possible language (without loops and control structures)
> 
>   Bad idea. The new language should be more powerful, not less.
> 
A small misunderstanding, I guess. What I proposed was to have a well 
defined low level language (think RISC) and on top of that a very user 
friendly one that directly communicates to the backbone.
That would separate the POV design into two more or less disjunct 
concerns. One with a focus on low level features and one with a focus on 
a user friendly interface. It is my experience that the set of people 
that are able to solve difficult mathematical problems and are able to 
implement those (provable) bugfree and understand the subtleties of 
language design is almost empty.
>   For example, I envision that with the new language you could, for example,
> create a function which opens and parses a JPEG2000 file and returns an
> image map from it. Or that you could create render-time code with it (like
> shaders and such) as well as post-processing code (which could very well
> benefit from things like loops and control structures).
> 
>   The current user-defined functions are a step towards this goal (after
> all, they can be evaluated at render-time, and you can even create loops
> with them).
>

Post a reply to this message