 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christian Froeschlin
Subject: Re: how to call multiple instances of a macro?
Date: 12 Mar 2009 05:53:41
Message: <49b8dba5$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> POV SDL may be cumbersome at times, but let nobody say it wasn't flexible...
ah very clever, faking an eval using file I/O! What a dirty trick ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christian Froeschlin
Subject: Re: how to call multiple instances of a macro?
Date: 12 Mar 2009 05:59:48
Message: <49b8dd14$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
CShake wrote:
> I wonder how much overhead this really causes, I figure that Christian
> Froeschlin's method of just using a selection macro and assigning
> numerical values to each macro name would be slightly more efficient
> when parsing, but involves more work for the user and is not very flexible.
if you don't call it thousands of times I think the overhead for
file I/O won't be too bad. Otherwise, a compromise might be to
generate the selection macro itself using #write in a loop.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfr de> wrote:
> ah very clever, faking an eval using file I/O! What a dirty trick ;)
YESS! =B)
"If at first you don't succeed... resort to dirty tricks"
The #write and #include combo rules!
I recently embarked on using file I/O to re-use interim parsing results, only to
find that hey, why mess around with #read and yet another #while loop to
assemble the objects in the second pass, when you can do *all* the work in the
first pass and just #include the whole smash...
From there, it is only a small step to #writing out complete scene files... or
just very short snippets of code, for that matter.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
