"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > (and no, I wouldn't use "rotate <1,1,0>*45" - rather some "rotate <1,1,0>,45",
> > which IMO would make it clear what's happening; I think I'd also use "rotate
> > <1,1,0>,45 deg".)
>
> ....while permitting, e.g., "rotate 30*<1,1,0>,45" or similar? I would hope that
> the new SDL would retain the way literals are handled (or close to it), however
> the object structure ends up.

Sure, "rotate 30*<1,1,0>,45" or even "rotate <1,1,0>*30,45" would be fair values
(though it doesn't actually make sense to scale a vector when you just want to
rotate around it...)

Post a reply to this message