> No-one has said that pov4 would be object-oriented. Yes, its _source code_
> will be object-oriented (that's the point of making it in C++ after all), but
> no-one has said that the povray scripting language will change that much.
> And by the way, the source code of povray IS already object-oriented.
    Yes, what a mean is the SOURCE CODE would be object-oriented.
    Now, how can you get OOP is C?
> 
> , my reaction was
> : "What, the current POV isn't OOP?!?". My aw of the POV Team grew as a
> : learned that they create such a raystacer WITHOUT oop! But for OOP to really
> : work, it must be *fully* oop.
> 
> Now I'm not sure if you are talking about the source code or the povray
> scripting language. As I said, the source code is OO (although made in C).
> The scripting language has some OO (or more precisely modular programming)
> characteristics.
    I mean the source code.
> 
> : I'm all for an object oriented POV-Ray language, as long as it is fully
> : object oriented.
> 
> Well, perhaps inheritance and dynamic binding could have some uses in the
> povray scripting language, but do you really think it's worth the efforts?
    Yes, I think it would be, if only for the sake of TRUE OOP.
    And by fully OOP, I mean in APPLICATION, more then concept.

Post a reply to this message