Le 20/04/2012 04:34, Alain a écrit :
>>>
>>> As of version 3.7 experimental support for reading the pixel resolution
>>> of an image map was added. This is done by giving an image map pigment
>>> identifier to max_extent(), which will then return the resolution of the
>>> image map as the x and y values of the returned vector.
>>>
>>> Sample code:
>>> #declare Image =
>>> pigment {
>>>     image_map {
>>>       jpeg "YourImage.jpg"
>>>       once
>>>       }
>>>     };
>>>
>>> #declare Resolution = max_extent ( Image );
>>>
>>> It return Resolution =<horizontal_size, vertical_size, 0>;
>>>
>>>

> max_extent() and min_extent() both return vectors. It's needed to define
> the bouncing box of the object used as an argument.
> In ordinary use, min_extent return the front or near, bottom left corner
> of the bounding box and max_extent() return the back or far, top right
> corner.

Indeed, I found the overloading a bit too much. Can't it be keep clear
and meaningful instead of a kludge on max_extend ?
what about

#declare Resolution = image_size ( Image );

instead ?
With neat specification about a 3D vector: width in pixel, height in
pixel, depth in bits or bit per channel ?
Maybe more than 3D vector ? 3rd one for the number of channels and 4th
one for the depth in bit per channel ?
What about alpha... 5D ?

Note: I'm talking about the SDL itself, I find perturbing reusing
max_extend in such context. I like dog called dog, and cat a cat.


If we go down to image analysis in SDL, are we not sacrificing some
concepts of Povray to make a clone of photoshop/gimp ?

-- 
Real software engineers work from 9 to 5, because that is
the way the job is described in the formal spec.  Working
late would feel like using an undocumented external procedure.

Post a reply to this message