Bruno Cabasson wrote:

would you still be able to do things like: ?

union {
	some code
	some objects
}

Is there a way to eliminate the 'make' and thus one set of nested {}? 
Instead of make (most often used), require 'method' or 'action' in from 
of methods like levitate.

Why a name for scene? Is the scene block necessary at all? This scene 
block is where it really gets "programmy" and where identical scenes in 
the NEW SDL will take more lines of code than those in 3.6 SDL.

I believe it would be cleaner if you could make CSG objects work more 
like primitive objects.

// three and four are "all the time" values like position
// and rad for sphere. In this case, they could represent
// Number of legs and height
// 'box' is an object definition OR another class with its
// own parameters. This is how its often done with macros
// now.

Stool { 3, 4, leg_shape { box 2 3 } pigment { rgb 1 } }

// The object definition might look like a function definition:
class Stool { Legs, Height, leg_shape=box {2, 3} }

// properties like pigment, texture, translate, etc. would have
// to be handled in a special way. Class-specific defaults for
// these values would not be allowed.
// This is sort of a class/macro cross.

For the most part, I think yours is a nice syntax which will allow 
things like rigging animation characters without allowing too much 
"elegance."

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message