Shay <Sha### [at] cccc> wrote:
> Adding clutter (and almost 
> certainly new bugs) to the interface for the purpose of overlapping the 
> capabilities of existing, non-renderer tools will not.

  For some reason you have this obsessive fixation about "if it can be
done with third-party tools, it should not be added to POV-Ray".

  Well, you know what? 3D images can be rendered with third-party programs.
Thus, by your logic, rendering support is not necessary in POV-Ray because
you can do it with other programs.

  So what if you can calculate subdivision of meshes with third-party tools.
Can you guess how many of these tools I have in my computer? Moreover, can
you guess how many of these tools are not available at all for my OS?

  Besides, even if I had a subdivision-capable program available for my OS,
it would still be clumsy to use. I would have to create or convert the mesh
to a format supported by that program, then I would have to perform the
subdivision, then I would have to export or convert the result to a POV-Ray
mesh, and then I would have to write the SDL file to read that mesh.
  Naturally this becomes more complicated if the original mesh was created
with POV-Ray itself (for example I have an include file which creates a
mesh in the shape of a surface of revolution, given the outline spline).

  It would be really, really handy if I could perform the subdivision in
POV-Ray itself. No conversions, no saving, no temporary files, no nothing.
Just one command and there you are: I have the subdivided mesh.

  Why you think enhancing POV-Ray in a way that allows creating this kind
of functionality is a bad thing goes beyond my comprehension.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message