"Chris Huff" wrote:
> I don't see how it is any less intuitive than the < X, Y, Z>
> vector syntax...the user would just be specifying expressions
> that would be evaluated when the function is computed instead
> of at parse time.

But I don't really know how the <X,Y,Z> syntax would work.

What I would prefer is to deform a mesh just like I would deform a point.
Like this:

Translate by <1,2,3>: P+<1,2,3>
Scale by <1,2,3>: P*<1,2,3>
Rotate 55 degrees about A axis: vaxis_rotate(P,A,55)

To make more complicated deforms I can take advantage of #local or #declare:

#declare A = P*<1,2,1>;
#declare B = P+<2,1,1>;
vrotate(A,90*x*B.x)

I find that it couldn't be more simple and intuitive than this. Could a
deform function be made to work the same way?

> Using macros would be too slow...

The macro was not the important part.

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated January 6)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message