Christian Parpart <cpa### [at] surakwarenet> wrote:
> Replacing it by its pow function make the source bigger

  Big deal?

> and (perhaps) not more readable.

  Isn't unambiguous text more readable than one where there could be
ambiguousity?

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

ABX inspired the electrons to say:
> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 15:42:54 +0200, Christian Parpart
> <cpa### [at] surakwarenet> wrote:
>> Well, there's a wonderfull water example using POV-Ray 3.5 wich makes
>> extensive use of that hat (^) operator.
>
> And this is bug you are reffering to ? Why you not ask author of this
> example to correct this bug ? He probably know that his example is not 3.5
> compatible.

Okay. I said "bug" because some other ppl previousely said that this is a 
bug. I found some older postings about ;) However.

>> Replacing it by its pow function make the source bigger and (perhaps) not
>> more readable.
> 
> Don't ask for not readable languages, please :-)

Hae? *g* I'm pretty sure that you either misunderstood me or you're just 
kidding ;)

Greets,
Christian.

Post a reply to this message

In article <upofkucs1srus56m3mmuv6k3nfaddog63r@4ax.com> , ABX 
<abx### [at] babilonorg>  wrote:

> Don't be soo detailed. Note about it is distributed with official release and
> is called in log:
>
> Change 1634 on 2002/05/30 by thorsten@host27
>   Removes "hat"-operator and replaces it with "pow"-function

Yes, the code was removed because it previously was added.  One adds and
removes code.  The change log is about a different level of detail - the
code level, not the feature level.

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message