Hi,


Thorsten Froehlich wrote:

> In article <3A0A8E83.C139438F@alpharay.de> , Paul Blaszczyk <3d### [at] alpharayde>
> wrote:
> These are both the same thing, there are no PPS of zero added, it is simply
> Total Pixels / Time, so if the time runs, the PPS will decrease as well.

Yes...i meant this    (but i was at work while writing this post, and my break
was over ;-)

> Besides, I think it has been explained very well when you (?) posted it two
> or so years ago why getting the precise time is not as easy as you think.
> If you didn't post it, I am sorry as there is no way you could have known,
> but then please just take my word for it.

I haven't postet this post. I've found the POV-newsgroup at middle/end of 99 (i
think)...my old provider hasn't supported news-groups  :-/


> Of course we can fix this.  Takes some work with low level process handlers
> and callbacks to make it "perfect", at least 20 to 30 hours of work until it
> works, I would guess (depending on the platform).  Considering that we can
> only spend about 2 to 5 hours per person on POV-Ray development (we have
> this real-life thing) every week, this should delay POV-Ray 3.5 only about 4
> to 15 more weeks...

Thats the reason i'm posting it....to make POV 3.5/4 more buggyless ;-)

Paul

Post a reply to this message