|
 |
hi,
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscape net> wrote:
> "yesbird" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > Sorry, solution was:
> > -------------------
> > _vector(1,, ) // OK
> > -------------------
> > Number of commas is matter
> > YB
yes, optional value(s), not position(s).
> Yes, and that's why I find that method awkward.
for YB's benefit, I think that may be just because the parser is so .. lenient
elsewhere. as you know, much POV-Ray code published here "skimps" on detail,
the ';' terminator is rarely used (or "taken serious" even, I feel), meshes and
such often omit the commas between neighbouring vector values etc. in fact,
'box {your ears}' would have sufficed ;-). with the macro it's simply that
w/out the commas, the parser would have no (literal) clue which of the args were
omitted.
> There's also no way to write a macro with a variable number of arguments - it
> has to be fixed.
> But now that we have dynamic arrays, and indeed, mixed arrays, I think I'd opt
> for passing an array of arguments in, and then having the macro analyze and
> process the array.
yes. (dictionaries, too)
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
