Thorsten Froehlich wrote:

>>  I know, but I don't blame the pov-team for that. It's not a bunch of
>>C-coders trying to make a C++ program, but a 10-years old gigantic C program
>>where some C++ has been added for certain features, not for the intention
>>of being the final thing, but for being an updated bugfix release before
>>the complete rewrite in C++ with good OO design.
> 
> 
> It should not be forgotten that "good OO design" is a far from trivial
> thing.  Especially when it comes down to the ugly little details that look
> great in the UML diagram, but are much harder to implement an second sight
> ... especially if the primary goal is raw performance the temptation to
> "just use C" is always around.  And in the end it will always be the wrong
> decision.

Can you tell what are/were the reasons for deciding to rewrite the whole 
POV-Ray in C++? Performance wise I think it doesn't mean much nowadays, 
but do you think OO suites POV-Ray better than plain ol' procedural C? 
It will be a huge task but do you think it will pay the effort as easier 
code maintenance and further development?

Severi Salminen

Post a reply to this message