Am 22.08.2016 um 13:11 schrieb Mr:

> For the exporter from Blender to POV it is possible to have a mesh object from
> which the user will have deleted all vertices, this user may not be willing to
> add anthing to the scene, but we have to assume that he does it on purpose, and
> would indeed want to keep track of the transformations of some point, BUT he
> uses an interface and doesn't even want to know what a vector or a matrix is.
> Also, the transformations would have to happen through all the same operators as
> the standard geometry exported. because creating a particular case may have
> inconsistant results.

A vector won't fit your purpose, since you need different code to
transform it.

Given that the described use case doesn't leave a vertex to track, the
most fitting analogon would probably be an empty union.

> Would a declared vector be able to pass through all the transforms a mesh2
> object can ever go through? if so I was wrong and should use a vector, but if I
> HAVE to add a vtransform or anything that all standard geometry can't go
> through, then I can't use it, because it's not a mesh... but it's a mesh. :-)

Maybe what we should do is change the behaviour of the parser when it
encounters a mesh2, to issue "possible parse error" warnings instead of
outright errors when it encounters an empty list of faces or empty list
of indices.

Post a reply to this message