Hm. How do I do it?

Rather heavy commenting on very excessive scenes, breaking
stuff into readable parts (several #declared objects that
are stitched together later), and using excessive commenting
to know what I've actually modelled, where it belongs
etc. If I'd use diagrams for reference, I'd probably save
those to disk and use the names I've been given (or have
given) from those diagrams, but I hardly do that.

Most of the time, my code is pretty readable, because my
scenes aren't heavily complicated, but drawing some
simple sketches helps a lot, even for more simple scenes.


--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde

> This is likely to generate one or two unintelligable responces...
>
> I'm currently working on - ok, well actually I'm currently working on
about
> half a dozen things; I usually am! But anyway, one of the things I'm
> currently working on is me optical (laser-powered) Enigma machine. I've
had
> about 4 goes at it now, and every time the code gets more and more
> complicated, and it gets harder and harder to follow what's happening,
never
> mind change anything.
>
> This is probably one of the most complicated scenes I've ever attempted!
(My
> usual work consists of a few spheres, some texturing, and one of POV-Ray's
> advanced features - photons, media, that sort of thing.) The only other
> thing I've ever made which was this complex was when I tried to make a
model
> of a 4-stroke engine. I eventually gave up on that because it got too
> complicated.
>
> Anyway, clearly this doesn't bother anyone else. So I was just
wondering...
> how do you folks build complex scenes who's sources can still be read and
> modified? (Or are you all just supremely fluky and get it perfect first
> time? ;-)
>
> Not a very specific question I know, but let's see what kinda answers I
> get...
>
> nam et ipsa scientia potestus est!
> Andrew.
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message