Well, relying on default values for just
specific functions (in this case, defaulting
to 1 just for scale) is quiet unpleasing
IMHO. This way, I can always expect
that 2 = <2,2,2>, and x*2 is <2,0,0>.

If you begin with scale to do
x*2 = <2,1,1>, then where do you want
to stop for "special default cases"?

Its just a useful warning after all! There
are simple rules for floats and vectors
and they simply apply everywhere, which
makes them easy to handle and interpret,
even in obfuscated code.

So, IMHO, let the warning be.

-- 
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
Email: no_lights (@) digitaltwilight.de


>
> > Marc Champagne <marcch.AT.videotron.DOT.ca> wrote:
> >> Would it not be wise for the scale statement to assume 1 instead of 0
> >> for those vectors that are not specified.
> >
> >   Certainly not. That would seriously break things like translate x*5
> > or box { 0,1 }
>
> I don't mention translate or box do I!
>
>
> >   It could be thinkable that the 'scale' command would be a special
> > case, where an element value of 0 is converted to 1. However, this is
> > what it already does. The only question is whether the warning is
> > relevant or not.
>
> Bingo
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 01.09.2003

Post a reply to this message