"Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message
news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3C6AE046.5D095B2C@scifi-fantasy.com>,
>  "Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote:
>
> > So because it can't be done for everything, it isn't done at all.
>
> It would be very difficult, probably requiring a rewrite, and about the
> only thing it would work for would be triangles and polygons. Even
> spheres would probably be too difficult...where's the edge of an
> unevenly scaled and rotated sphere?

Easy.  Rotate and scale the eye, and then it becomes a normal sphere :)

> And then you have things like the
> different camera types, camera normals, etc, which would make it
> unuseable for any object...

No, just some objects.  And besides, most (all?) objects have bounding
shapes which can be used for the guesswork :)

> It is simply not worth implementing for the few cases it would actually
> be any help.

I disagree here, but I don't know how much work would be required in the
implementation.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message