I guess that never occurred to me, possibly since I have experience with web
development and some application development as well.
Normally when using objects I just put them all at the end of the file in a
long list of OBJECT statements. This is my first attempt at making a macro,
and I didn't realize that the multiple objects within the macro were trying
to be processed as a single object within the final object statement at the
end of the file.

"Hughes, B." <omn### [at] charternet> wrote in message
news:3eed6b42@news.povray.org...
> "Lutz-Peter Hooge" <lpv### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
> news:3eed6582$1@news.povray.org...
> > Jessie K. Blair <jbl### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> >
> > > When I run this code I get an error from the parser that states "Parse
> > > error: No matching } in 'object', object found instead.
> >
> > There can be exactly one object inside 'object{...}'. Your macro
> > generates many objects, so you must use a union instead.
>
> Glad you knew that, I think a lot of people might believe you could group
> things into a single object statement for it to act similar to union. It's
> something I had to think twice about although I knew that was the obvious
> answer, because if I were to write this:
>
> #declare AllObjects=
> object {
>  object {Object1}
>  object {Object2}
>  texture {ObjTex)
> }
>
> couldn't you imagine the object wrappers might collect them into a group
> same as union does? Perhaps not if there weren't 'object' for each
> (identifier alone)...  Just one of those things that seems plausible until
> the error proves otherwise.
>
> Bob H.
>
>

Post a reply to this message