"stevenvh" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Let me start by answering your point b. I'm not familiar with the construction
> of the pvengine, but I would never underestimate its complexity, and I won't
> expect that this could be added overnight. Note that I say "a future version"
> and not "the next version" :-)

.... which is where I again start musing...

> (A propos your musings about "a brand new SDL", I hardly dare to say this aloud,
> but I actually wouldn't mind that. I have a strict programming background (both
> procedural and event-driven), and the mix or procedural and descriptive
> language sometimes confuses me, as does the loose and sometimes inconsistent
> syntax and grammar.)

I not only wouldn't mind - I actually think that POV is ripe for a new SDL.
However, at the moment all efforts are geared towards multiprocessing and a
better modularization of the code, so this new SDL thing just has to wait (and
is in fact probably dependent on the modularization job).

That's one reason why, when talking about kludges that would faciliate
implementing OO concepts with macros, I'd say it's not worth investing time
into it.

Post a reply to this message