clipka schrieb:
> Warp schrieb:
>
>> It feels quite confusing. How about reusing existing keywords for a
>> clearer syntax:
>>
>> radiosity { emission on/off }
>> radiosity { collect on/off }
>
>
> How about sticking to the established megapov syntax, hm?
Well - since i have originally chosen the SDL syntax for this feature in
MegaPOV i thought i'd put in my 2 cents.
I have no issue with either of these two ways per se. I however think
that both Warp's and clipka's arguments are not particularly convincing.
My choice was simply for the IMO most obvious way from my perspective as
a programmer and POV-Ray user given the state of the SDL in 3.6. This
does not make it a perticularly good choice from a broader perspective
of course.
The SDL is - due to the repeating addition of new features -
inconsistent in many parts. Some aspects of this have been mentioned in
this thread, others have not. Using the photons syntax is not
necessarily a better idea than the no_* syntax - radiosity is different
from photons both the way it works technically as the way it is used.
OTOH the reuse of keywords is a good idea and the possibility to extend
the syntax with new features is as well.
This is not about choosing the good way as opposed to the bad way. Both
syntax versions bear inconsistencies (heck even skipping this feature
completely would). If you cannot come to an agreement simply flip a
coin... ;-)
BTW i think the no_radiosity implementation in MegaPOV is in fact
incompatible with POV-Ray 3.6 since no_image in 3.6 implied no_radiosity
and in MegaPOV it does not. I am not completely sure about this any
more though.
As a side note one somewhat related feature i have missed occasionally
is something like a no_image flag that maintains the objects 'ability'
to hide other surfaces (other objects or other surface parts of itself)
from direct view. Combined with alpha channel output this could be used
to render individual layers of certain features of a scene.
-- Christoph
Post a reply to this message
|
