|
 |
On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:12:25 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>
>Bob Hughes wrote:
>>
>> Yikes. No iso-surface part of the Official POV-Ray 3.5? That's got
>> to hurt.
>
> If Ron doesn't correct me here there are parts of the ISO-Surface patch
>that can be ported without having to use the .dll files in question.
Quite. Most people aren't using the stuff in the DLLs anyway, but the
MSDOS version of the superpatch has all the functionality without any
DLLs. The only things that are in DLLs are the "library" functions,
which could easily be done as internal functions a la "mesh" and "helix".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
Paranoia, that's it... sorry I spoke abruptly Thorsten. I saw that
part of the quote from Chris Cason which Ken had posted and
immediately began to think of what life would be like having to always
use the Super Patch instead of a Official POV-Ray. Sorry Ron, or more
appropriately the many contributors to S.P., I'm not saying I don't
care for S.P. of course : )
Hmmm, does the frequently-asked-questions group have any posts
regarding 3.5? A while back I unsubscribed to that, among others, to
cut down on news retrieval. Don't think anything ever stops the
rumors from roaming though.
Bob
Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trf de> wrote in message
news:37eb28a0@news.povray.org...
> In article <37eb03e4@news.povray.org> , "Bob Hughes"
<inv### [at] aolcom>
> wrote:
>
> > Yikes. No iso-surface part of the Official POV-Ray 3.5? That's
got
> > to hurt.
>
> Why do you assume this? "We will likely eliminate that part of the
patch."
> does obviously *not* mean we eliminate the whole patch, does it???
> Sorry for sounding a bit unfriendly, but I don't think wild rumors
or
> assumptions will help you find out what POV-Ray 3.5 can or will be
able to
> do :-) And specifically the iso-surface issue has come up and been
> clarified several times by now ... if even the little bit of
information
> that there will be a 3.5 next and a few general issues about it
create such
> a lot of confusuion, maybe for 4.0 there should be no details
available in
> advance?
>
>
> Thorsten
>
>
> PS: This is my _own_ opinion, I do not speak (write) for the team!
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
> Quite. Most people aren't using the stuff in the DLLs anyway, but the
> MSDOS version of the superpatch has all the functionality without any
> DLLs. The only things that are in DLLs are the "library" functions,
> which could easily be done as internal functions a la "mesh" and "helix".
I think I mentioned before that I couldn't get the superpatch to compile on
VC++ 5, so I used parts of the DOS superpatch sources. So the minipatch
doesn't use the dlls either.
-Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
