 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now that Pov v3.1g has been made publicaly available I suggest we keep
those bug reports down to an absolute minimum so the Pov team has a chance
to concentrate on Pov v3.5 which will actaully add new features to the program.
How about it people !
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <37839A4A.3102B735@pacbell.net>, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbell net> wrote:
> Now that Pov v3.1g has been made publicaly available I suggest we keep
>those bug reports down to an absolute minimum so the Pov team has a chance
>to concentrate on Pov v3.5 which will actaully add new features to the program.
>
>How about it people !
Where do you work, Microsoft? :*)
I would say that real bugs should definitely continue to be reported, or
(a) the new, enhanced 3.5 will still have them, and (b) the bugs will
carry through into the new features.
I'm a big fan of giving bug fixes higher priority than new features.
Jerry
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jerry wrote:
> Where do you work, Microsoft? :*)
>
> I would say that real bugs should definitely continue to be reported, or
> (a) the new, enhanced 3.5 will still have them, and (b) the bugs will
> carry through into the new features.
>
> I'm a big fan of giving bug fixes higher priority than new features.
>
> Jerry
Ah come on now Jerry. If you find a function that does not work right
just play with something else instead. If it's broke don't use it.
Gee wiz !
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
>
> Jerry wrote:
>
> > Where do you work, Microsoft? :*)
> >
> > I would say that real bugs should definitely continue to be reported, or
> > (a) the new, enhanced 3.5 will still have them, and (b) the bugs will
> > carry through into the new features.
> >
> > I'm a big fan of giving bug fixes higher priority than new features.
> >
> > Jerry
>
> Ah come on now Jerry. If you find a function that does not work right
> just play with something else instead. If it's broke don't use it.
>
> Gee wiz !
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
I have to agree with Jerry, though the MS comment was a bit harsh ;)
There have been bugs that carried through several versions simply
because the POV-Team were not aware of them. Better to base any new
versions on a package that's as bug free as possible.
Maybe if we all use some feature that we normally don't use, then
discuss anything we think might be a bug here in povray.general, we
might get the most bug free new version yet.
Cheers, PoD.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Heh, Kens evil twin on the loose again I see.
Um, this last comment of PoDs made me think that twin ain't half bad
though. I know I can never get a unknown feature or function of POVs
figured to be buggy or not because I have no experience with those
seldom or never used things. I'm sure people have their own capabilities
with POV whether new to something or not, and perhaps that should be the
focus since we vary on our understanding of each part.
PoD wrote:
>
> >
> > Ah come on now Jerry. If you find a function that does not work right
> > just play with something else instead. If it's broke don't use it.
> >
> > Gee wiz !
> >
>
> Maybe if we all use some feature that we normally don't use, then
> discuss anything we think might be a bug here in povray.general, we
> might get the most bug free new version yet.
>
> Cheers, PoD.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob Hughes <inv### [at] aolcom> wrote:
: Heh, Kens evil twin on the loose again I see.
: Um, this last comment of PoDs made me think that twin ain't half bad
: though. I know I can never get a unknown feature or function of POVs
: figured to be buggy or not because I have no experience with those
: seldom or never used things. I'm sure people have their own capabilities
: with POV whether new to something or not, and perhaps that should be the
: focus since we vary on our understanding of each part.
This is not always the case.
When I tried the averaged normal feature of POV-Ray for the first time,
I soonly found the average normal bug. I immediately saw that it didn't
work as it should.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
>
> Now that Pov v3.1g has been made publicaly available I suggest we keep
> those bug reports down to an absolute minimum so the Pov team has a chance
> to concentrate on Pov v3.5 which will actaully add new features to the program.
>
> How about it people !
>
That one is food for my boss. I always go up to him with 'you flood me
with WAY too much work' and get back with 'you have a concentration
problem', 'get organized', 'managers are tought to check what they've
been doing every fifteen minutes'.
That last one is his very special favorite.
Not that I recommend any of these.
A bug is a bug and a feature is a feature. It's up to the gods of pov,
which will happen first.
Axel
PS: PovRAY 3.5 : It's not a bug, it's a feature.
(That one's harsher than that MS one, I DO apologize)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well said, Ken. During all my years with Pov I've come across a relatively small
number of bugs. They rarely prevent me from obtaining a particular effect and when
they do, there are enough other features in pov to play with. Bugs are annoying and
bug hunting may be fun but it's pov's features that make it great.
Gilles
Ken wrote:
> Now that Pov v3.1g has been made publicaly available I suggest we keep
> those bug reports down to an absolute minimum so the Pov team has a chance
> to concentrate on Pov v3.5 which will actaully add new features to the program.
>
> How about it people !
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Axel Hecht <ah### [at] numerikuni-kielde> wrote:
: PS: PovRAY 3.5 : It's not a bug, it's a feature.
People really don't know what is a bug.
It's very annoying that people keep sending "I don't like the way this
works"-messages as bug reports.
Bugs are programming mistakes. Something should work this way but it
doesn't because the programmer made a mistake while typing the code. Bugs
cause a behaviour which is completely unintentional and different from
the meant behaviour (like the average normal bug). Sometimes a bug is just
the lack of a feature because somebody just forgot that (like the #local
with same name but different type as the #declare).
If something doesn't work the way you like, it doesn't mean it's a bug.
If you don't like that planes are solid instead of hollow 2D sheets (and
you keep getting the "camera inside non-hollow object" warning), that does
not mean that it's a bug. (Actually planes _have_ to work that way or they
will not work in CSG anymore.) Sendig a _bug_ report about this is extremely
stupid.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well said. Often there are workarounds for bugs in POV. These can be
used until the POV-team fixes the bugs.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
