Am 26.11.2016 um 16:13 schrieb Jim Holsenback:

> yes that's what i ended up doing, but got distracted (woof) with
> something else before i could reply. i'm trying to make sure i
> understand the pathology here ... earlier in this thread a bug was
> mentioned. the array/dictionary changes exposed the issue? devils
> advocate would say that this should be documented as a {{Change}} ...
> i'm guessing somewhere in the array talk page that's been currently
> reworked?

No, the array/dictionary changes are not to blame (not for this at any
rate; despite the dictionary syntax also happening to use dot notation).

Instead, the change that "broke" it was commit fa4a158, "Fix promotion
bug (#130)", which fixed this bug:

http://news.povray.org/3c4bb31d$1@news.povray.org


In my opinion there is no {{Change}} to be documented: The new behaviour
matches what has always been in the docs, and what people have always
been expecting -- if it wasn't for the mucking around with macros; it is
the fundamental way macros work (which hasn't changed a jot) that
constitutes the only potentially surprising element in this context. It
is the same mechanism that has always been the potential source of
surprise in coce such as:

    #macro Sum(A,B,C)
      A+B+C
    #end
    #declare X = Sum(1,2,3)*3;

That thing has never worked as intended, so why should anyone expect the
`.y` operator to behave any different in this respect?

Post a reply to this message