Le 18-11-15 à 13:38, clipka a écrit :
> Am 15.11.2018 um 18:33 schrieb Le_Forgeron:
> 
>> Now, let's fight about trace_uv_map or any better spelling or wording.
> 
> Since you cannot compute an UV coordinate without computing an 
> intersection, I would lean towards designing this as an extension to the 
> existing `trace` function, via yet another optional parameter after the 
> normal variable. That way we can avoid double work when the user wants 
> both the intersection point's location and the UV coordinates.
> 
> Also, if for some reason we need to implement it as a separate function, 
> I would prefer `trace_uv`. We don't have the `map` appendix in any other 
> UV mapping related stuff (e.g. it is `uv_vectors`, not 
> `uv_map_vectors`), so adding it here would be inconsistent.

So, it should look somewhat like :

#declare Location= trace( Object, Start, Dir, Normal, UV_Location );

or

#declare Location= trace( Object, Start, Dir, Normal, UV_colour );

If it ever get implemented.



Alain

Post a reply to this message