Ben Chambers wrote:
> 
> "Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message

> > I wasn't talking about copies, but an alternate rendering method. A
> > "tesselate" flag that would cause the object to be tesselated and
> > rendered (and traced) as a mesh. Copies would be textured the same way
> > any other object copies are textured.

I do not like that idea of flag.

> 
> Question:  Would it be appropriate for, say, "tesselation" to have it's own
> block of code inside the object declaration (the same way as texture, media,
> interior, etc)?  This way, all tessellation-only transformations /
> deformations whatever get grouped together for easy reference.

I still think that a tesselated object is just an object, and that deformation
of mesh are still another object whose parameter is an input mesh and some
additional parameters.

Having a 'tesselation' block would mean to provide a view to the user which 
would really be very different from the internal: because the user would see
it as an extension of any object, whereas in real code, the object would
have been completely replaced by something else.

Moreover, some object won't be able to support this block, which is really
annoying because it breaks the homogeneity of the 'object' in Pov.

Last, I do not believe that transformation of mesh are similar to blob component:
 the order in which the transformation are made usually is important.
 So adding a 'tesselation block' would means to have something similar to
layered texture, which would just prouve to be counter-productive for mesh
transformation in the current state of the code.

-- 
Non Sine Numine
http://grimbert.cjb.net/
Puis, s'il advient d'un peu triompher, par hasard,

Post a reply to this message