In article <atl84u8632rgr5ka4rajo53d23tagqsejd@4ax.com>,
 W?odzimierz ABX Skiba <abx### [at] babilonorg> wrote:

> What I understand from his post he propose new syntax with the same 
> output image. So no problem to replace parsing functions with current 
> 3.1 or future 3.5. Almost everything in 3.5 comes as patch on 3.1. 
> The point was to make patch on 3.1 (later 3.5) or any 3rd party 
> utylity (like yours CSDL) to support 4.0.

Some things aren't possible to do cleanly, you have to hack around the 
existing source code, and some of the proposals affected the deepest 
parts of the rendering code. It isn't always feasible to have something 
to demonstrate, he would probably have to make a mockup of a renderer.
The output image may be the same, but that doesn't really matter...


> > > Writing new parser without changing other stuff is
> > > IMO no more difficult than organizing MegaPOV by Nathan and/or
> > That used the existing parser.
> I mean effort not function.

Writing a parser is a bit harder than writing code to use an existing 
parser. ;-)


> And it's great idea to propose new things this way. Working versions...

But to do what he is talking about would require extensive integration 
with the renderer, so a "working version" would essentially be a new 
renderer...CSDL is quite a bit simpler, being just a language.
However, what he's doing by making an in-depth description of his ideas 
and testing them out here is just as good as a working prototype.

-- 
 -- 
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
(currently struggling with the expression parser for CSDL)

Post a reply to this message