While I was browsing the groups I stumbled upon this archaic,
dust-covered post.

=======Start Message=======

Message-ID: <3697A9C2.9AF6D1C4@lick.pvt.k12.ca.us>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 11:10:58 -0800
From: Geoffrey Romer <gro### [at] lickpvtk12caus>
Newsgroups: povray.general,povray.programming
Subject: POV-Ray and Perl

It has always struck me that POVRay and Perl make a
natural team. Perl's text-processing facilites, and the fact
that it is a full-featured programming language, make it a
great choice for automating the construction of scenes
which are, for one reason or another, difficult to build by
hand. I have seen a few mentions of this approach at the
IRTC. However, I have yet to come across any mention
of a more general solution- a POVRay Perl module, which
would simplify the process of developing Perl scripts for
POV output, and thereby keep every Perl-POV
programmer from having to start from scratch.

In light of this, I would like to develop just such a module.
However, I have no wish to duplicate someone else's
effort, or step on their toes, so if a POVRay Perl module
already exists, could someone let me know where I could
get information about it?

Thanks in advance.

======= End Message ========

I know how you feel about Perl, and from what little experience I have
with it, I can relate. However, it might be worth checking out for any
progress on Geoffrey's idea. Another thing that comes to mind is to
take a look at Steve's Object Builder and see how much it satisfies
your needs.

Old ideas never die. They just don't get implemented :)


Peter Popov
pet### [at] usanet
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

Johannes Hubert wrote:
> 
> 
> Well, I guess it is rather a strange idea, since probably no-one would
> use
> it anyway... :-)
> 
> Johannes.

Although I think your idea is good I'm afraid your conclusion is even
better.

I've tried making something that is very vaguely similar to something
that comes a teeny bit in this direction until it occurred to me that
the benefit was too slow for the effort: you're trying to help people
who are addicted to typing POV-scripts. They're lost.

On the other hand if there's anyone who'd like to give this a try I'd
very much like to see (test) the results.

Good luck anyway :)

Remco

Post a reply to this message

Peter Popov <pet### [at] usanet> wrote in message
news:DKs+OMvOvsPdtod3jt3ltZw+V2zL@4ax.com...
[snip]
>
> I know how you feel about Perl, and from what little experience I have
> with it, I can relate. However, it might be worth checking out for any
> progress on Geoffrey's idea. Another thing that comes to mind is to
> take a look at Steve's Object Builder and see how much it satisfies
> your needs.
>
> Old ideas never die. They just don't get implemented :)

Indeed! :-)


Anyway, *if* I should create such a Java-POV, it would be more or less for
the fun of doing so, and that fun I (personally) can not gain from
programming Perl (brrr :)
This means also, that the main goal is not as much to find something
existing that somehow satisfies my needs (like that I quickly need a tool I
can use in an ongoing project), but to create something new, for the fun of
it (I like programming, haven't you guessed ;-).

Still it would probably be hopless to try to convince anyone else to use it
once it is done, because those POV-users that already do script their scenes
(as opposed to those using modelers) are, as Remco wrote, addicted to the
POV script anyway :-) and my (statistically totally unfounded) guess would
be, that also only a few of them already know Java, which would mean, that
they would have to learn a new language to do essentially the same they are
doing already with POV :-)
Now that would be a topic for one of those endless surveys that have been
popping up recently in p.off-topic: How many of you know Java? (no, no, that
was a joke!)

If I ever proceed to more than just "musings" about this, I will tell you
all - at a povray newsgroup near you! :=)

Johannes.

Post a reply to this message

I tend to try every POV-related but of software if I think it will be
of use to me. If ever you complete this project and release a final
version, I will be glad to try it out. And no, I don't know Java, but
maybe it was about time I learned it :)

Does Java support macros and defines? Can a "scene" in this
hypothetical Java-Pov-whatever language look a lot like a POV scene if
hacked around with defines?


Peter Popov
pet### [at] usanet
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

Peter Popov wrote:

> I tend to try every POV-related but of software if I think it will be
> of use to me. If ever you complete this project and release a final
> version, I will be glad to try it out. And no, I don't know Java, but
> maybe it was about time I learned it :)
>
> Does Java support macros and defines? Can a "scene" in this
> hypothetical Java-Pov-whatever language look a lot like a POV scene if
> hacked around with defines?

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonoooooooooooooooooonoooooooonononononono!!!!!!!!!

Ack.
Defines are horrible. Bad bad things. Java has no defines nor macros. No
goto either. No operator overloading...

Hmmmm...
But it would not be very hard at all to come up with an XML format for
the POV-ray scene and read and parse it in Java. Then feed it to
POV-Ray...


--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.

Post a reply to this message

Jon A. Cruz <jon### [at] geocitiescom> wrote in message
news:383F74FE.1B8CB1DD@geocities.com...
> Peter Popov wrote:
>
> > I tend to try every POV-related but of software if I think it will be
> > of use to me. If ever you complete this project and release a final
> > version, I will be glad to try it out. And no, I don't know Java, but
> > maybe it was about time I learned it :)
> >
> > Does Java support macros and defines? Can a "scene" in this
> > hypothetical Java-Pov-whatever language look a lot like a POV scene if
> > hacked around with defines?
>
>
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonoooooooooooooooooonoooooooonononon
onono!!!!!!!!!

Wide Grin.

I must agree with Jon. There wouldn't be much reason for a JAVA-POV to look
exactly like the old POV, would there? Why would someone want to use it
then, better to stick to the original...
No, the idea was to use a more powerful "real" programming language to
create even more complex "scripted" scenes than "possible" with pure
POV-Script (which means: "Possible in an easier and halfway readable,
maintainable and understandable way", because everything is just plain
*possible* in POV-Script of course, the question is, how difficult it is).
Other people had the same idea earlier, using C++ or Perl for that, I
thought Java would be good for that too...

Greetings,
Johannes.

Post a reply to this message

Johannes Hubert wrote:

> Jon A. Cruz <jon### [at] geocitiescom> wrote in message
> news:383F74FE.1B8CB1DD@geocities.com...
> > Peter Popov wrote:
> >
> > > I tend to try every POV-related but of software if I think it will be
> > > of use to me. If ever you complete this project and release a final
> > > version, I will be glad to try it out. And no, I don't know Java, but
> > > maybe it was about time I learned it :)
> > >
> > > Does Java support macros and defines? Can a "scene" in this
> > > hypothetical Java-Pov-whatever language look a lot like a POV scene if
> > > hacked around with defines?
> >
> >
> Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonoooooooooooooooooonoooooooonononon
> onono!!!!!!!!!
>
> Wide Grin.
>
> I must agree with Jon. There wouldn't be much reason for a JAVA-POV to look
> exactly like the old POV, would there? Why would someone want to use it
> then, better to stick to the original...
> No, the idea was to use a more powerful "real" programming language to
> create even more complex "scripted" scenes than "possible" with pure
> POV-Script (which means: "Possible in an easier and halfway readable,
> maintainable and understandable way", because everything is just plain
> *possible* in POV-Script of course, the question is, how difficult it is).
> Other people had the same idea earlier, using C++ or Perl for that, I
> thought Java would be good for that too...
>
> Greetings,
> Johannes.

XML! XML! XML! XML! XML!


--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.

Post a reply to this message

Jon A. Cruz wrote:
>
>XML! XML! XML! XML! XML!

Eversince I started reading about XML I thought that a nice 3d description 
language could be made with it. 
Isn't there a team converting VRML into X-VRML?

Ingo

-- 
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray    : http://members.home.nl/seed7/

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 1 Jan 1998 08:51:12 +0100, "Johannes Hubert"
<jht### [at] nove-mailcom> wrote:

>Wide Grin.
>
>I must agree with Jon. There wouldn't be much reason for a JAVA-POV to look
>exactly like the old POV, would there? Why would someone want to use it
>then, better to stick to the original...

Because I see no sense in typing 'add new whatever' when you can
substitute it with whatever java has as pre-compiler macro or define.
I understand that it would be great to be able to extract or change
the object properties (like camera.lookAt) but I don't think it would
be a good idea to altogether lose the old syntax. OTOH, if what I am
saying is not possible in java, that's ok.

How about making the necessary extensions to the POV Language and
writing a Java or Perl parser to convert that syntax to standard POV
syntax? This will have the advantage of keeping old syntax while
easily adding new.


Peter Popov
pet### [at] usanet
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

Peter Popov <pet### [at] usanet> wrote in message
news:MNNAOMlTUWWCDFVamJgQwVvUdwcY@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 1 Jan 1998 08:51:12 +0100, "Johannes Hubert"
> <jht### [at] nove-mailcom> wrote:
>
> >Wide Grin.
> >
> >I must agree with Jon. There wouldn't be much reason for a JAVA-POV to
look
> >exactly like the old POV, would there? Why would someone want to use it
> >then, better to stick to the original...
>
> Because I see no sense in typing 'add new whatever' when you can
> substitute it with whatever java has as pre-compiler macro or define.

I understand. But as Jon already said, Java hasn't any macros or
preprocessor.
>
> How about making the necessary extensions to the POV Language and
> writing a Java or Perl parser to convert that syntax to standard POV
> syntax? This will have the advantage of keeping old syntax while
> easily adding new.

an interesting idea...

Johannes.

Post a reply to this message