|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Wolfgang Wieser wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> But about things like my "radial slope pattern" (rather small and simple)
>> or the "progressive refinement patch" (which would require somebody else
>> write the windows/mac - related part).
>
> The PRT patch is on the 'considered' list of MegaPOV for some time now
> but without support on the other platforms it won't be included. You
> say 'somebody else' should write that but that's not the way it is
> likely to work.
>
Well, I simply have no access to mac here - and no windows (compiler)
around. So in case we really want to consider putting it into megapov,
I/we need to ask for somebody willing to do that.
> I only had a quick look at the implementation but the design is somewhat
> problematic - you implement a lot of stuff in a new C++ class but this
> no way forms a well defined unit inside POV. Implementing a new render
> method in a C++ class does not make POV-Ray a C++ program and it will be
> quite painful to apply other changes to this part afterwards.
>
Hmm... What would you suggest should be done differently?
I put the code into the class in order to surely avoid naming collisions
and to make it easy to see what belongs to the PRT patch.
And about POV and C++, I'm a bit puzzled when reading the rest of the
code, especially the image IO. It seemed to me that decision was taken
to C++ify the C code for 3.5 and above ending up in a lot of C in cpp
files with a little bit of C++. I'm not having a very good feeling when
it comes to that.
> Not to
> mention that text output via fprintf(stderr, ...) is not the right way.
>
Yes, correct. There are some things which need to be cleaned up for
actual inclusion. The fprintf's are basically debug messages which I
found to be useful so I did not remove them.
Wolfgang
Post a reply to this message
|
|