 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Are they going on on some other Pov-Ray newsgroup? The Pov4 group I could
> get to
> seemed to be involved with other things. I may have said too much anyway.
Check the povray.pov4.discussion.general group, particularly the threads
"Next Generation SDL Brainstorming" and "Next Generation SDL: What's wrong
with Lua, JavaScript, ...".
If you have something to contribute (eg "Hey I think my suggestion is better
than any OOP idea I've seen, and here's why...") then you should post it in
that group. This group goes off-topic very quickly no matter what you say
:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/24/09 02:53, David H. Burns wrote:
> Yes, I'm now told that a new scripting language is decades away so I
> suppose
> my major concern is about 20 years or so too early. What language or
> with what
> "philosophy" Pov-Ray is coded in is of only minor concern, if the end
> product remains
> usable to me.
The decades was an exaggeration. However, it is a while away. Work has
not begun on 4.0, and it intends to be quite different from today's
POV-Ray - and not just in terms of the scripting language.
--
AD&D Famous last words: Me first. Me first!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> Check the povray.pov4.discussion.general group, particularly the threads
> "Next Generation SDL Brainstorming" and "Next Generation SDL: What's
> wrong with Lua, JavaScript, ...".
Thanks, Scott,
I see only 4 threads and neither of these. Thunderbird is giving me
problem?
I initially told it to download only 100 messages and can't get it to
down load anymore.
After unsubscribing and re subscribing a couple of times, it downloads
only 107. Maybe
power on power off will help.
David
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/24/09 03:43, Invisible wrote:
> Now you guys know how *I* feel when I try to tell people that functional
> programming is a good idea. ;-) Nobody ever seems to believe me...
I, for one, propose that the SDL in POV-Ray 5.0 should be functional.
--
AD&D Famous last words: Me first. Me first!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/24/09 07:38, David H. Burns wrote:
>> Now you guys know how *I* feel when I try to tell people that
>> functional programming is a good idea. ;-) Nobody ever seems to
>> believe me...
>
> You encourage me. But we seem to be out of fad. ;-) :) (An attachment
Hardly, What you like is procedural. Functional programming is a whole
other beast altogether, where you normally don't do explicit loops but
use constructs like map, filter, etc. Lots of lambdas thrown in as well.
--
AD&D Famous last words: Me first. Me first!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The decades was an exaggeration.
I made a formula to figure out when v4 will be complete :-)
2009 + B + K*(A + B)
Where:
A = years already spent on v3.7 devlopment
B = years still to go until v3.7 is complete
K = multiplier for amount of work needed for v4 compared to v3.7
A is 5 I think? Choose some values for B and K and see what you get!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Now you guys know how *I* feel when I try to tell people that functional
>> programming is a good idea. ;-) Nobody ever seems to believe me...
>
> I, for one, propose that the SDL in POV-Ray 5.0 should be functional.
I'm not sure whether we should go for 100% functional, or do 95%
functional. You know, like the way SQL is 95% relational (but still 5%
procedural). I'm unsure at this time...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Check the povray.pov4.discussion.general group, particularly the threads
>> "Next Generation SDL Brainstorming" and "Next Generation SDL: What's
>> wrong with Lua, JavaScript, ...".
>
> Thanks, Scott,
> I see only 4 threads and neither of these. Thunderbird is giving me
> problem?
I don't use Thunderbird, but maybe someone else might be able to help you.
In Windows Live Mail you can choose "Tools -> Get Next <X> Headers" where X
is the value you set for how many to download at a time - maybe there is
something similar?
If not then you can always use the web view here:
http://news.povray.org/povray.pov4.discussion.general/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> Now you guys know how *I* feel when I try to tell people that functional
>>> programming is a good idea. ;-) Nobody ever seems to believe me...
>>
>> I, for one, propose that the SDL in POV-Ray 5.0 should be functional.
>
> I'm not sure whether we should go for 100% functional, or do 95%
> functional. You know, like the way SQL is 95% relational (but still 5%
> procedural). I'm unsure at this time...
I wonder if it would it be possible for POV to expose its core functions in
a standard way (eg in a dll for windows), and then you can access them from
any programming language you like. The SDL parser just needs to be a
special case that parses the file and calls the same POV core functions that
you can from your own code.
It would make things like doing complex simulations much easier, because you
could use eg C++ to get good speed, and have POV render the result quickly
each frame. Also if you wanted to use Haskell, or anything else, you could.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> I wonder if it would it be possible for POV to expose its core functions
> in a standard way (eg in a dll for windows), and then you can access
> them from any programming language you like. The SDL parser just needs
> to be a special case that parses the file and calls the same POV core
> functions that you can from your own code.
>
> It would make things like doing complex simulations much easier, because
> you could use eg C++ to get good speed, and have POV render the result
> quickly each frame. Also if you wanted to use Haskell, or anything
> else, you could.
That's an interesting idea. However, I have a vague recollection that
this would be incompatible with the terms of the POV-Ray license.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
