"Christopher James Huff" <cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:cjameshuff-625719.08263725022004@news.povray.org...
> In article <403c3ec3$1@news.povray.org>,
>  "Hughes, B." <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
>
> > Where MySphere remains defined but gets additional info attached to it.
Or
> > all at once:
> >
> > ThisSphere.sphere.color {<1,2,3>,1,<0.1,0.2,0.3,1,0>}
>
> def ThisSphere = sphere {<1,2,3>, 1 pigment {<0.1,0.2,0.3,1,0>}}
>
> The dot syntax is just about always used for accessing parts of an
> object, not for creating one. Like vector .x, .y, .z, or color .red,
> .green, etc.

Ahh yes, thanks for that clarification. I suspected as much but it was
looking to me like everything was to be built in the same way as accessing
it later.

> > Then raytraced when only the name stands alone:
> >
> > ThisSphere
>
> There's several ways adding the object to the scene could be handled,
> this is one way.

I like not having to use object {ThisSphere}, so this is a good thing I
think. Minimized scripting in the same vein as not needing parent wrappers,
which I believe you actually mentioned back in the thread someplace, could
be nice. Maybe not clear until learning what's what, but easier to write.

> > And so it's difficult to think of doing this for evermore complicated
> > things. Am I on the wrong track to believe this way?
>
> Yes. You're assuming you would have to do everything in a much more
> complex fashion, this is not the case. The final result could be very
> similar to the current POV language in general use.

Okay. But, admittedly, it would still become more code-like for the writers
of it. Yet, presumably, easier to use the result. Regardless, I think all
this will come down to a widened dividing line between casual artists and
data-crunchers. Since no one knows the future for certain it could go either
way, good or bad thing. Maybe no worse than other changes had been. Hmmm...
That's a statement not to be taken too lightly. The halo, semicolons,
patterns... sounds ultra mild compared to most of the talk in this thread.
;-)

Bob H.

Post a reply to this message