Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> 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

  I would like to make it clear that I didn't suggest a block syntax for
radiosity settings because photon settings have that too, or because I thought
that radiosity was similar to photons. In fact, I wasn't thinking about the
photon mapping feature at all when I made the suggestion. It was only later
in the thread that I came up with the comparison with photon mapping.

  The basic idea was to use a block syntax to group different radiosity
settings consistently and clearly. The photon settings are a good example
of this (but, as I said, not the reason why I suggested it in the first
place).

  If there was one single per-object radiosity setting, then "no_radiosity"
would be ok. However, there are already two, and it isn't completely
unthinkable that in the future perhaps more will be added. Thus it would
be a good idea to take that into account now, when it's still possible.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message