On Fri, 12 Oct 2001 15:04:59 +0100, Tom Melly wrote:
>"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
>news:3bc6e99b@news.povray.org...
>>
>> Because it did not meet the code quality and functionality requirements for
>> an officially supported feature.  If you feel comfortable reading source
>> code go and see for yourself in the MegaPOV source code of method 1 - it is
>> really obvious what major problems it has.  If you are not a programmer,
>> please take my answer as is: Any explanation would be very long and
>> impossible to understand without knowing the source code and how method 1
>> works.
>
>Aww, now I'm intrigued and I didn't even care before.... No offence - I'm sure
>you're right - but can we code-idiots have the potted-version and decide for
>ourselves that it's impossible to understand.... ;)

It'd be nice to be able to make an explanation that means something to code
idiots, but that would require us to have started with code that can be 
understood by someone besides the person or people who wrote it.  There were
no comments, the code flow was all over the place through three seperate 
modules that had no apparent organization, it had global variables that did
weird things at weird times, and on top of all of that it had been ported
from 3.0 to 3.1 in the most expedient possible way by Yours Truly.

-- 
plane{-z,-3normal{crackle scale.2#local a=5;#while(a)warp{repeat x flip x}rotate
z*60#local a=a-1;#end translate-9*x}pigment{rgb 1}}light_source{-9red 1rotate 60
*z}light_source{-9rgb y rotate-z*60}light_source{9-z*18rgb z}text{ttf"arial.ttf"
"RP".01,0translate-<.6,.4,.02>pigment{bozo}}light_source{-z*3rgb-.2}//Ron Parker

Post a reply to this message