Am 22.12.2012 14:46, schrieb denis.beurive:
> Hello,
>
> Thank you for your answer.
>
> Yes, we can run POVRAY from the command line... but it opens the user interface
> !
> You have to specify /EXIT if you want to close the window when the rendering is
> done...
> And there is no way to specify the INI file.
>
> I'd thought something like :
>
> povary -s my_scene.pov -i my_inifile.ini -o my_image.jpeg -I include_path

Try

   povray -Imy_scene.pov my_inifile.ini -Omy_image.jpeg -Iinclude_path


> I looked at the code.
>
> First of all it looked very clean.

So we're obviously talkig about POV-Ray 3.7.


> I tried to build it on my Macbook pro (Mac OS X version 10.7.5), using the GNU
> compiler.
> I know it would not build, but I just wanted to see how far I could go.

Why didn't you get the Unix source package, instead of the Windows source?


> First of all, it seems that the following libraries could be installed using
> some packaging tools (ex: for MAC, "ports") :
>
> libraries/jpeg
> libraries/png
> libraries/tiff
> libraries/zlib
>
> ...
>
> Is their any reason to include this third part libraries in the POVRAY
> distribution ?

Note that they're only included in the Windows distribution.

Yes, there's a very compelling reason: The concept of such library 
"packages" is alien to the Windows ecosystem.


> Regarding the OS independence, I am not sure. While I compile on MAC OS X, I
> have the following message :
>
> CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set
>
> This message seems wrong, because new Apple computers uses Intel processors
> (that supports 64 bits).

Sounds more to me like your compiler isn't set up properly. Something 
like a combination of "please generate 64-bit code" and "target CPU is 
generic x86".


> I did not dig further. I'd do it later.
>
> Does POVRAY uses assembly ?

No.


> Regarding the execution speed, I have no idea if using an interpreter would
> change something.

As for parsing speed, POV-Ray /does/ use an interpreter (except for 
functions, which are compiled into some kind of bytecode), so it can 
only get better.

Post a reply to this message