In article <40664bea@news.povray.org>, Lurker <sha### [at] nightcom> 
wrote:

> Development time: Someone said that POV-Ray developers should spend 
> more time working on the rendering engine than on the parsing one. 

After it's written, the scene parser wouldn't require that much work, 
and writing it in the first place isn't that difficult. Also, the scene 
language is part of what makes POV-Ray so useful, throwing away that 
advantage would be a huge mistake.

In addition, it would be another thing out of the POV Team's control. 
They would have to keep up with version changes, incompatibilities, and 
bugs. And before you say that they can fix the bugs themselves because 
Parrot is open source, those bugs would be in a completely separate code 
base that does far more than what is needed and which is maintained by a 
completely different group. People compiling POV-Ray would first have to 
have a port of the correct version of Parrot. And, being designed for 
scripting languages, Parrot would perform very badly at the kind of 
floating point math required for POV-Ray, making it useless for anything 
but the scene description itself.


> - Language choice:

Bad idea. It would make exchanging objects and scene code far more 
complicated. Support would be far more difficult, and we *would* have to 
support it. Coding scenes would be more difficult...none of those 
languages are built for it.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message