![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 8 Apr 2004 03:31:42 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256 com> wrote:
>
>Interesting - this spot is beeing in different position in each render
>(with same source !) so it is some kind of memory-leek or uninitialized
>variable
Isn't there always some differences in pixel values when using radiosity
and even without.
-r
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
rei### [at] rocketmail com news:40751045$1@news.povray.org
> Isn't there always some differences in pixel values when using radiosity
> and even without.
I ment in *same* render run twiced
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
"Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256 com> wrote
> So between today and discussion "Pov 3.6 expiration again..." there was a
> new pov 3.6 beta? I thought they will announce it here, sory then, Im going
> to download it.
No, we don't announce it here, we assume that users who consider themselves
sufficiently intelligent to use clearly-labelled beta software are also
intelligent enough to find that a new version is available once the old one
expires, WITHOUT our having to hold their hand and tell them. Even if we *do*
miss the expiration date by a day. All it takes is a single look at the beta
web page to see if beta 3 has been posted. (The other beta users seem to have
managed this feat of mental agility quite neatly.)
Beta users are made quite aware that we do *not* want reports from old betas.
The fact you are posting bug reports here about an expired version (when the
specific reason for the expiration is to prevent just such a thing), added to
your previous complaints about the expiration date system altogether, says to
me that you are not a suitable person to be testing our beta software.
In future please refrain from using POV-Ray betas. Use the official version
if you want, but do *not* download or install anything from us labelled 'beta',
and please cease to use any of our beta software that you have already installed.
thanks for your co-operation,
-- Chris Cason
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
"Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256 com> wrote
> Btw it would be a good idea to put dates also in formay DD-MM-YYYY imho,
> more comfortable for non-english speakers.
No it would not be a good idea to do so. DD-MM-YYYY format is practically
useless on an international web site, specifically because it (on its own)
lacks any context to tell if it's a US-style date or an international style
date (except in those cases where the day of the month is > 12). In particular
DD-MM-YYYY will confuse a *lot* of Americans.
For example are you able to tell me if 10-05-2004 is the 10th of May or the
5th of Oct ? If you say 'yes' then how ? It could be either, depending on
context and author. If you say 'no' then why do you suggest that format be
used for any date in preference for, e.g., the much clearer 'May 10th 2004' ?
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Ouch!
Jim
"Chris Cason" <new### [at] delete this povray org> wrote in message
news:4076bcb5@news.povray.org...
>
> "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256 com> wrote
> > So between today and discussion "Pov 3.6 expiration again..." there was
a
> > new pov 3.6 beta? I thought they will announce it here, sory then, Im
going
> > to download it.
>
> No, we don't announce it here, we assume that users who consider
themselves
> sufficiently intelligent to use clearly-labelled beta software are also
> intelligent enough to find that a new version is available once the old
one
> expires, WITHOUT our having to hold their hand and tell them. Even if we
*do*
> miss the expiration date by a day. All it takes is a single look at the
beta
> web page to see if beta 3 has been posted. (The other beta users seem to
have
> managed this feat of mental agility quite neatly.)
>
> Beta users are made quite aware that we do *not* want reports from old
betas.
> The fact you are posting bug reports here about an expired version (when
the
> specific reason for the expiration is to prevent just such a thing), added
to
> your previous complaints about the expiration date system altogether, says
to
> me that you are not a suitable person to be testing our beta software.
>
> In future please refrain from using POV-Ray betas. Use the official
version
> if you want, but do *not* download or install anything from us labelled
'beta',
> and please cease to use any of our beta software that you have already
installed.
>
> thanks for your co-operation,
>
> -- Chris Cason
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
> No it would not be a good idea to do so. DD-MM-YYYY format is practically
> useless on an international web site
YYYY-MM-DD is the answer (that's ISO standard I guess).
- NC
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
"Jim Kress" <pov### [at] kressworks com> wrote:
> Ouch!
yep, it may seem harsh, but frankly I'm tired of the complaints. He's the
only beta tester that I can recall who not only openly admits (some might
even say 'boasts') about (in his words) 'hacking' the betas to extend expiry,
but *then* goes on to complain about bugs in the expired version!!!
he is well aware (and has been told) that the purpose of the expiry is to
prevent this exact thing. yet he does it anyway.
while the team does appreciate the input of beta testers, this particular
case has just got me too annoyed to allow it to continue to the NEXT expiry!
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
new### [at] delete this povray org news:4076c63a@news.povray.org
> in the expired version!!!
This bug is stil in beta 3, see my new post.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
new### [at] delete this povray org news:4076bf4d@news.povray.org
> For example are you able to tell me if 10-05-2004 is the 10th of May
> or the
Imho best format is YYYY-MM-DD, because it is same natural as normal
writting of numbers - more important digits come first.
And also for example *_YYYYMMDD.* files are in same order when sorted both
by date nad by file-name.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 9 Apr 2004 12:28:52 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256 com> wrote:
> Imho best format is YYYY-MM-DD, because it is same natural as normal
> writting of numbers - more important digits come first.
Would you like to point me to definition of 'natural writting of numbers' ?
follow-ups set because of einundzwanzig.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |