|
 |
iceqb <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> I completly agree, POV-Ray shouldn't become an advanced programming language
> like C++ or Java, but it should offer POV-artists a much more easier way of
> making complex and realistic scenes.
One could argue that those two things are actually the same thing.
> I don't want to have to learn C++ before using POV
A fully-featured object-oriented language does not automatically mean
that you *must* learn *all* the intrinsic complicated details of the
language in order to create scenes. I have always wondered why so many
people seem to think like it does.
Let me present a comparison, using Windows:
Does a regular user, who just wants to surf the net and read his email,
have to learn how to edit the Windows registry?
The answer is naturally: No.
Is it *bad* that Windows includes the means to edit the registry?
Of course not. Those who want to edit it can do so. Is that bad?
The fact that a feature *exists* does not mean that you *must* even
know about its existence in order to use the program.
If fully object-oriented features are added to the scene description
language, so what? It doesn't necessarily mean that you must learn to
use them in order to create scenes.
You have to realize that there are two kinds of POV-Ray users: Artists
and developers.
The idea with enhancing the language is that developers have better
better tools to create easy-to-use libraries for the artists to use.
Wouldn't you like it if you could just write 'import("scene.3ds")' and
magically the 3ds file is imported and rendered?
If the SDL is enhanced enough and if some developer creates such a
library, then you can do exactly that, ie. import 3D-Studio files with
a one-liner (without even having to know that something called
"object-oriented programming" even exists).
So I more or less completely disagree with you: POV-Ray *needs* and
would greatly benefit from a fully-featured programming language.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
