>... POV's attachment to triangles rather than quads, and the
> fact that once it goes in to SDL (even future SDL) it's never coming out
> again? I don't see the advantage.

No doubt NURBs will end up in 4.0 in some fashion since
they are requested quite often.

I would think that the syntax of 4.0 must retain most of
the look and feel of current SDL.  This is part of why I
think that breaking up the scenes into sections like
environment{} pre_process{} ... scene ... post_process{}
would make sense.  That way certain advanced features
would be easily located.

Imagine being able to overload object definitions...

environment {
   overload {
      box{A,B}
      //wireframe objects
      cylinder {A,<A.x,A.y,B.z>,0.05} ... etc
   }
}

in order to change all the regular boxes in your scene into
wireframe.  This is aspect oriented, which is a good fit
for Pov, IMO.

Object oriented would mean the attachment of methods...
for non-programmers that means functions, which in the
case of Pov probably would end up being to manipulate
graphic objects. That might end up with something like...

box {A,B
   modify {wireframe(diameter)}
}

Where wireframe is a method for box. The problem with
this is that wireframe is probably going to be defined
somewhere in C++ instead of in SDL.  The functions would
be handy, but limited by your ability to program and
compile, most artists will avoid that I think.

Post a reply to this message