POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : #version directive : Re: #version directive Server Time
29 Apr 2024 14:08:14 EDT (-0400)
  Re: #version directive  
From: Kenneth
Date: 9 Feb 2018 23:55:00
Message: <web.5a7e7a7dc5234a59a47873e10@news.povray.org>
"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
> Also, this:
> "...and a CHANGE as of POV-Ray 3.7.1 or later it is now considered an outright
> error to use #version 3.71 or higher in a main scene file that does not start
> with a #version directive."
>

Not to nitpick, but I'm still having trouble 'parsing' that sentence ;-)
The way I see it is like this (and using a bit of Clipka's clarifications):

1) The #version directive is now a requirement (actually since v3.7.0, I think.)
That's clear.

2) Starting with v3.7.1 (alpha, beta, whatever), it's now considered an outright
error to leave out a #version directive in a scene. That's clear too-- I
think(?)

3) but: "... to use #version 3.71 [which is in green in the docs, meaning the
#version directive in a scene] in a a main scene file that does not start with a
#version directive", is the troublesome part. It kind of sounds 'circular' or
not quite logical. But I think there are two ways of reading it:

       A) An OLD scene file (one that didn't use a #version directive to begin
with) would produce "an outright error" if #version 3.7.1 were added to it AND
the scene were to be run in v3.7.1  (I'm actually still not sure if this
intepretation is correct.)
       B) Assuming that v3.7.1 (or later) *is* the currently running version,
and the scene itself does have #version 3.7.1 in it, then the scene already HAS
a #version directive-- definitely not a situation where the scene "does not
start with a #version directive"(!)  In this intepretation of the sentence, it
doesn't make much too much sense (and this is the way I generally read it,
unfortunately... without some effort to second-guess its meaning).


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.