In article <39e3aa1a@news.povray.org>, "Nathan Kopp" <Nat### [at] Koppcom> 
wrote:

> The intent is for one warp block to describe one warp.  If we want 
> multiple warps (as your examples do) then I think it would be good to 
> have multiple warp blocks.  If you want to specify more than one warp 
> in a single block, then you should name the block with the plural 
> "warps" instead of singular "warp".

Hmm, I always thought it acted similar to the transform{} block...but if 
a warp{} block is considered to be one warp, it certainly would make 
sense to have the transformations affect it like they would a pattern or 
object, instead of acting like warps themselves.

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message