In article <4033cd99@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> 
wrote:

> Tom Melly <pov### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
> > There's a challenge... Warp? What would, IYHO, a bit of Pov-OO look like?
> 
>   If it were solely up to me, it would look as much as C++ as possible.
> 
>   However, it's not up to me. (Fortunately? ;) )

Very much so... ;-)

POV OO doesn't have the same needs, so it could be simplified quite a 
bit. No need to have any static binding, for one thing. Dynamic typing, 
much less worrying about what type something is. No need for multiple 
inheritance. Forget about templates, don't need pointers, don't need 
primitive types. Pass everything by reference, don't need explicit pass 
by reference. Just straight public inheritance, probably with categories 
and interfaces. I'm undecided about private/protected access. They would 
be a good thing to have from the language design point of view, but 
aren't really necessary...

-- 
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