In article <384d0ae5@news.povray.org>, ron### [at] povrayorg wrote:

> Probably, yes.  The easiest thing to do is probably start with Chris 
> Huff's object-based pattern code, because he's probably already gone
> to the trouble to add a pointer to the associated object (and associated 
> constructor/copy/destructor code) to TPAT_FIELDS.

Actually, there might be a bug in the way I did it. I intended to have 
it take a pointer to the actual object instead of copying the object to 
the pattern structure, but the code I wrote might not have done that(due 
to a possible misunderstanding of how identifiers are handled by the 
parser).
I ran into this when I added my patches together into one patch, and the 
object pattern crashed unless I added code to copy the object.
Of course, I will be looking at this closer, and it probably also 
affects my proximity pattern.

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

Post a reply to this message