In article <3E11EA94.61D5B83A@gmx.de>,
 Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:

> > The "listed" pattern looks like the "solid" pattern from my old patch
> > tutorial and MegaPOV+. Frankly, I like my name better, "listed" gives no
> > impression of what the result is. 
> 
> 'solid' is also used for crackle solid so this might lead to confusion.

Minimal. It makes perfect sense to me...knowing what "solid" is, 
"crackle solid" is pretty obvious, and the same goes for the reverse. 
"listed" is extremely vague. "constant" would work, but I still prefer 
"solid".
The patch has my name on it, but I would never have chosen "listed", I 
think it's a terrible choice. Since the whole thing is redundant, I'd 
just remove it.


> Concerning the displace warp - i was planning to add a new function warp
> (as well as warp functions, i think those things have been discussed
> somewhere previously) and therefore voted for not including the displace
> warp but the others thought it would be good to add it for convenience.  

I would have voted for leaving it out. It will be less convenient coping 
with changes or replacements (and I have those in mind).


> Concerning glows: warps and transformations are supported.  A new glow
> patch - sounds good, give it a few days rest but i am pretty sure we can
> arrange something.  It should be obvious that none of the MegaPOV features
> will stay as it is forever and features can also vanish again when there
> is a new better solution. So don't worry too much about possibly outdated
> functions. 

But in the past, MegaPOV was much more than a patch version, more people 
used it than the official version. Those features could at least have 
been marked "not final" in the documentation.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message