"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3e629e4d@news.povray.org...
> St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> >       Warp, I have to agree with xplo, his reposted code was fine
in
> > any pov laymans' terms - I cut and pasted it and got the desired
> > render - no problem, it was simple.
>
>   It's not the code which is specially problematic. His attitude
about my
> comments is what made me lose my temper. He basically called me
stupid.

   No, I don't think 'stupid' was intended. It could simply have been
because more bandwidth was wasted explaining what to do with the code
than should have originally been wasted. You give valuable advice many
times Warp, which is very much appreciated by myself and doubtless
others, but it was a molehill, and then a mountain for no real reason.

   Let's all have a cup of hot chocolate...  ;)

    ~Steve~

>
> --
> #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{
>
(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  -
Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
>   When I ask you to post a short, minimized and clean scene which shows
> the phenomenon you are talking about, and then I explain myself what I
> mean by minimal, you start insulting me.

Let me recap for you. I know it's hard to understand what's happening 
with your head up your ass.

Xplo: "I decided to see what would happen if I averaged two opposed 
normals together." (example code follows) "I assumed that they would 
completely cancel out.. but instead, they produced a weird, not exactly 
granite-like normal that's quite noticible. Why is this?"

Warp: "Btw, it would be nice if you would make a complete rendable (sic) 
scene showing the phenomenon so that people can simply copy-paste it to 
povray, render it and quickly see what you are talking about instead of 
having to set up a scene."

This is a reasonable request, so I provide exactly what you asked for: a 
complete renderable scene showing the phenomenon so that people can 
simply copy-paste it to povray, render it and quickly see what I'm 
talking about.

The smart and reasonable thing for you to do, at this point, would be to 
answer my question, if your knowledge makes you capable of doing so. I 
have provided everything you could possibly need to understand what I'm 
talking about, including a complete test scene that shows exactly what 
I'm talking about in considerable detail.

You didn't do the smart and reasonable thing.

I didn't ask you to fix my code, I didn't need you to fix my code, I 
didn't *want* you to fix my code, and I found your condescending and 
totally useless response insulting. I had absolutely no interest in 
comparing and discussing our coding styles, which, despite your denials, 
is essentially what you were talking about. What I wanted was an answer 
to my question.. something you made no attempt to provide.

>   I said that if you want help from people, it's good and polite to see
> some trouble in making it the easiest possible for the people to study
> your code and not expect people editing and understanding your code.

Warp, there's like 30 lines there.. and that's with my generous use of 
whitespace. There are POV-Ray tutorials which are more difficult to 
understand than my code, and it renders AS WRITTEN. I gave you exactly 
what you asked for. Not only that, but my original post explained 
*exactly* what was going on.

I find it strange that you object to my insults, considering the lengths 
you've gone to to deserve them.

-Xplo

Post a reply to this message

Xplo Eristotle <xpl### [at] infomagicnet> wrote:
> What I wanted was an answer 
> to my question.. something you made no attempt to provide.

  You still don't get it, do you?

  You want an answer, but with that attitude of yours it's less likely that
you are going to get one. Insulting people who are trying to help you is
not the right way of getting answers.

  Compare it to this: Someone asks a question with a really bad English
grammar. Someone corrects his grammar errors and says that if he uses
proper English it's more likely that people will understand him and give
a proper answer. Now, two things may follow:
  1. The original poster thanks this person and learns something useful.
  2. The original poster tells this person to fuck off and mind his own
business.
  Which one of these two things is more likely to help the original poster
to get a proper answer?

  Some people might find it insulting if someone corrects their grammatical
errors. However, getting pissed off and starting insulting is not the correct
way of getting what they want.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
>   Compare it to this: Someone asks a question with a really bad
> English grammar. Someone corrects his grammar errors and says
> that if he uses proper English it's more likely that people will
> understand him and give a proper answer. Now, two things
> may follow:
>   1. The original poster thanks this person and learns
>   something useful.
>   2. The original poster tells this person to fuck off and mind
>   his own business.

It took me ages before my US colleagues understood that when I ask to
correct me when I make spelling or pronunciation mistakes I really mean it.
They simply could not believe it, because that is generally considered an
insult.

So when "someone corrects his grammar", and that was not asked for, good
deal of people would argue that he insults the one who has asked a question.
Too bad you are not aware of that fact.

Now let's have a look at what, and how, you "corrected"... This time you,
again, ran straight into the area of personal preferences (just as you did
when we were discussing C++ type casts), and yet you use sentences like
"unneeded whitespace bloating the code", which clearly implies that your
"opponent" did something wrong. Consider these three *facts* (I stress,
facts):

1) If Xplo's code would have a bit *more* spaces (specifically, at the
beginnings of the lines w/o braces), his code would be much closer to
so-called "fully bracketed syntax" than yours.

2) The "fully bracketed syntax" is what POV-Ray sources follow, mostly.

3) There are approximately as many proponents of that syntax as opponents.
I, personally, like it very much. But I also know those who say that POV-Ray
is written by lamers (and this is based solely on the syntax rules it more
or less follow).

Did you get the idea?

By the way, I'm now ranting, I am speaking as a mentor, and I do realize
that. But I do so for a purpose... I would like to ask you, Warp et al.: how
does it feel when someone talks to you like that?

Post a reply to this message

There seems to be a misunderstanding here.

  I'm not talking about how people should *usually* code, or how they should
indent their code when posting entire scenes (eg. to povray.text.scene-files).
You are talking as if I had asked him to change his coding style.
  This is not true. I did not ask him to change anything in his coding style.

  What I did suggest is that when *asking a question* related to some
POV-Ray feature, a minimal, yet complete piece of SDL code showing the
problem should be posted along with the question, and moreover, *this
specific code* (not the poster's usual code, but this specific code
related to this question) should be edited so that the *relevant* part
of the code stands out, and irrelevant parts are kept as secondary in
shape so that they don't stand out (eg. by making them one-liners).

  I repeat once again: I did not ask him to change his usual coding style nor
expressed any opinion about it.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
>   This is not true. I did not ask him to change anything in his coding style.

That's true, Warp. You didn't ask. You just took it upon yourself to 
revise my code, because it was "bloated" with "unnecessary whitespace".

>   What I did suggest is that when *asking a question* related to some
> POV-Ray feature, a minimal, yet complete piece of SDL code showing the
> problem should be posted along with the question...

Which is what I did, jackass.

The original code was a mishmash of objects, declared textures, notes to 
myself, and a lot of other junk. I cut it down to one camera, one light 
source, and one object with one texture. Oh, so I left in seven lines of 
directives and global settings. BIG FUCKING DEAL.

If you'd just answered my question in the first damn place, I wouldn't 
have this attitude. You'll note I've been perfectly civil to Kari, who 
had the sense to try and help instead of proving how "smart" he is by 
insulting my code and then pretending that it's for my own good somehow. 
Maybe if you hadn't been a useless, condescending asshole, I'd have been 
civil to you too.

You're the one who doesn't get it, Warp. I gave up hope that you would 
be of any use to me several posts back. When I said that I hoped someone 
would help me, I meant someone with the wit to say something relevant in 
  response to my question, and that obviously doesn't include you.

-Xplo

Post a reply to this message

"Xplo Eristotle" ha scritto 
: // Test scene demonstrating apparent improper normal averaging.
: 
: #version unofficial MegaPov 1.0;

...

: sphere
: {
: <2, 1, 0> 1
: normal
: {
: average
: normal_map
: {
: [ granite 1 scale 1 ]
: [ granite -1 scale 1 ]
: }
: }
: finish { specular 1 }
: }
: 

What does the fine manual say about normal_map? (6.7.2.2)
I'm talking of POV-Ray's manual ...


BTW I think Warp is correct, if you want that someone opens a debugger
and starts a debug session in search of a possible uninitialized variable, 
or an overflow/underflow, a typo... whatever it is. 
I think it is very kind of you to remove *ALL* parts surely not 
responsible of the wrong behaviour and then read the manual to be sure 
that what's left is correct.

Massimo

Post a reply to this message

Massimo Valentini wrote:
> 
> What does the fine manual say about normal_map? (6.7.2.2)

Nothing that would explain this phenomenon.

> BTW I think Warp is correct, if you want that someone opens a debugger
> and starts a debug session in search of a possible uninitialized variable, 
> or an overflow/underflow, a typo... whatever it is. 

He'd be correct, *if* that was what I wanted (although my scene was so 
small and simple that he has no right to complain, anyway. It'd be like 
debugging "hello world"). I provided the code so that people could 
render it and see the averaging bug I was talking about, as well as 
being able to verify that I'm not doing anything stupid (such as 
applying the normal to a bumpy isosurface), not so it could be analyzed 
for hidden flaws. The flaw is in the software, not the scene.

-Xplo

Post a reply to this message

Xplo Eristotle <xpl### [at] infomagicnet> wrote:
>>   What I did suggest is that when *asking a question* related to some
>> POV-Ray feature, a minimal, yet complete piece of SDL code showing the
>> problem should be posted along with the question...

> Which is what I did, jackass.

  And in your opinion it's me who should be ashamed of myself?
  Regardless of your insults and name-calling, I haven't responded back
in the same way. I have simply tried to explain myself. Have you even tried
to understand? You probably do understand, but you simply refuse to admit
it because you don't want to agree with me in anything.

> The original code was a mishmash of objects, declared textures, notes to 
> myself, and a lot of other junk. I cut it down to one camera, one light 
> source, and one object with one texture. Oh, so I left in seven lines of 
> directives and global settings. BIG FUCKING DEAL.

  Now you contradict yourself. First you claim that your code was minimal
("which is what I did"), and now you admit that it had seven lines of
irrelevant code. Which is it?

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
>   And in your opinion it's me who should be ashamed of myself?

I like bagels, but not lox.

>   Now you contradict yourself. First you claim that your code was minimal
> ("which is what I did"), and now you admit that it had seven lines of
> irrelevant code. Which is it?

*ahem*

 >> Oh, so I left in seven lines of
 >> directives and global settings. BIG FUCKING DEAL.

It's pretty sad when you ask questions that I can best answer by quoting 
the post to which you're replying.

Tell me, Warp, did my initial post leave you with any doubt regarding 
the phenomenon I was describing? Did you really have as much trouble 
understanding my test scene as you imply? Did those seven lines of code 
(one of which was somewhat useful in the scene, one of which was blank, 
and two of which were braces) really leave you so confused that you 
couldn't paste the scene into POV-Ray and render it?

In short, are any of your objections practical?

If the answer is yes, then you're an idiot. If the answer is no, then 
you're an asshole.

I see no reason to stop "insulting" you, since that would be lying by 
omission, but feel free to let me know which term I should apply to you 
in the future.

-Xplo

Post a reply to this message