Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> > I haven't seen any argument from you that does a thing to truly address
> > that issue.
>
>   That's because you have a misunderstanding about how transformations work.
>
>   Answer me this: Why the current POV-Ray doesn't need object-specific
> transformation arrays?
>   The answer is not "because it re-parses the objects at each frame".
> That re-parsing could perfectly be skipped with the proper syntax changes.
>
> --
>                                                           - Warp

Appart from this (somewhat sterile) passionate discussion, the problem of
animation-specific features and releted syntax seems to be a major concern
for POV4. I encourage other people here to search for ideas and make
propositions. Patrick proposed something, Warp disagrees, and both argue.
OK, fine.

Now, are there here experienced people that could give us some additional
advise and share their knowledge to help us find our way? Warp, you seem to
have theoretical skills and experience, more than many of us. How would you
envision things if you were to design the new language?

Bruno

Post a reply to this message