|
 |
in news:web.4a0b00b73a7e550e405e15c60@news.povray.org clipka wrote:
> Peter Hokanson <pch### [at] rice edu> wrote:
>> This may seem a little odd, but why not use Python as an SDL?
>> ...
>> If not Python, then perhaps some other established language should
>> be considered.
>
> This has already been discussed quite a lot and quite often.
>
> I am by now convinced that with *all* well-established languages,
> such an approach would invariably lead to an SDL that may be quite
> fitting for programming complex stuff, but cumbersome for the most
> essential tasks the SDL will have to be used for: Describing the
> actual scene elements to instantiate.
>
> I think the right way to go is take an established free open-source
> language (which should be bytecode-based, have a very simple core,
> and designed to be embedded into other software; my current champion
> for this would be Lua) and replace or heavily modify its parser to
> suit the specific needs of POV-Ray.
>
> If there's one thing a new SDL *must not* do, then it's making
> plain-vanilla scene description significantly more cumbersome than
> with the current SDL.
>
>
>
10 years ago this was written.
Sorry for diggin up a thread this old, but, how a bout a concept like in
the Seed7 extensible programming language
http://seed7.sourceforge.net/faq.htm#extensible_programming . That would
make it possible to write and render include files and when all is fine
(trans)compile them so they become 'part' of the SDL. (This without regard
of the choise for actual syntax.)
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
