In article <388d1251@news.povray.org>, "TonyB" 
<ben### [at] panamaphoenixnet> wrote:

> This just got me thinking (actually the idea has been floating around in 
> my
> head for a while), the way reflection has been growing, wouldn't it be 
> nice if instead of
> 
> finish
> {
>  reflection_type
>  reflection_min
>  reflection_max
>  reflect_metallic
>  etc.
> }
> 
> we could have
> 
> finish
> {
>  reflection
> {
>  val / min, max
>  type
>  metallic
>  etc.
> }
> }
> 
> wouldn't it be shorter and less bothersome than reflection_x? I think 
> that
> the number of reflection parameters have gotten to a point where this 
> would be a good idea.

I have done something similar to this in my reflectivity patch, which 
mostly just gave a new syntax to blurred/angle-dependant reflections. 
The syntax for this patch is pretty strange,though. Several things are 
controlled by patterns instead of float values.
But it wouldn't be difficult at all to simply add an alternate syntax. I 
don't really care for the current one...

-- 
Chris Huff
e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/

Post a reply to this message