PLugins, plugins, plugins, plugins... Everyone requests plugins. Everyone
makes plugins. Hundreds of plugins, thousands, millions... And moray grows
and grows and grows...

  Instead of making a plugin for each simple task (like the random placement
of objects), wouldn't it be a better idea to allow the user to write little
povray scripts to do the task instead?
  For example for the random placement of an object you would only open
an editor window for the specified object or whatever and just type the
povray code for its placement.
  If you type something that creates objects you could somehow tell to moray
how to create a wireframe for that object (in povray's comments or in a
completely separated window with its own scripting language or something).

  So instead of making hundreds and thousands of little programs for each
task (and still being unable to perform every task), you could just have a
few powerful tools to perform any task (ie. a unix-like system).

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
>   PLugins, plugins, plugins, plugins... Everyone requests plugins. Everyone
> makes plugins. Hundreds of plugins, thousands, millions... And moray grows
> and grows and grows...
> 
>   Instead of making a plugin for each simple task (like the random placement
> of objects), wouldn't it be a better idea to allow the user to write little
> povray scripts to do the task instead?

And limit Moray to POV-Ray?  I like the fact that Moray has been opened
up to support generic export capabilities.  If you do nothing but
POV-Ray scripts, you can't ever take advantage of anything but POV-Ray.

Xander

Post a reply to this message

Alexander Enzmann <xan### [at] mitreorg> wrote:
: And limit Moray to POV-Ray?  I like the fact that Moray has been opened
: up to support generic export capabilities.  If you do nothing but
: POV-Ray scripts, you can't ever take advantage of anything but POV-Ray.

  Did I say that the scripting should be the only way to create objects?

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Alexander Enzmann wrote:

> Nieminen Mika wrote:
> >
> >   PLugins, plugins, plugins, plugins... Everyone requests plugins. Everyone
> > makes plugins. Hundreds of plugins, thousands, millions... And moray grows
> > and grows and grows...
> >
> >   Instead of making a plugin for each simple task (like the random placement
> > of objects), wouldn't it be a better idea to allow the user to write little
> > povray scripts to do the task instead?
>
> And limit Moray to POV-Ray?  I like the fact that Moray has been opened
> up to support generic export capabilities.  If you do nothing but
> POV-Ray scripts, you can't ever take advantage of anything but POV-Ray.
>
> Xander

Also, couldn't you just do that in POV-Ray anyway? I believe the idea behind moray
is so that you can model it quickly, without having to worry about syntax, and
typing, etc. While it might be nice to tweak POV-files, I wouldn't want to have to
type in 10 lines of code every time I wanted to replicate an item.

Also, I agree with Xander- I like the fact that Moray will export to things other
than POV-Ray(RIB!!!!!YAY!!!!Please, someone!) Restricting this will limit morays
growth.


--
You Know You've Been Raytracing Too Long When:
 You tell stories to your kids that #include stuff like "Once there was a polygon
mesh who was very sad because he was only Gourard shaded."

Post a reply to this message

Alex Magidow <axi### [at] mninternet> wrote:
: Also, couldn't you just do that in POV-Ray anyway?

  The point is that you could do that while still being able to see the
wireframe and model with the mouse. You can do it with povray, but you
can't see the scene before you render it.

: While it might be nice to tweak POV-files, I wouldn't want to have to
: type in 10 lines of code every time I wanted to replicate an item.

  No-one is saying that every creation/transformation process should be done
by scripting. A scripting language would be nice to create things not possible
with the GUI.
  Ok, suppose that somebody gets the random placement plugin. Now you would
want to place the objects randomly along a sine-wave. What do you do? Since
you have no plugin for this, you a) don't do it, or b) make another plugin
or enhance the existing plugin for this.
  Oops, now you want the objects along the curve exp(x^2)*cos(x^3)-tan(5).
What do you do? Another plugin?
  With a scripting language you just type the function in the right place
and that's it.
  Got it?

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

I've always thought a script based modeller plugin would be cool.

Perhaps an "Insert Code" plugin could be created to perform this task while still
allowing Moray to be useable with other renderers.  This plugin would allow you to
enter some textual code and add a simple visual representation (just a cube?!?) in
the Moray Scene.  The Modify tab would only need a button to allow you to access a
code editor for modifications to the code, and some parameters that tell Moray
where the code should be inserted or if it should be saved as a seperate include
file & referenced in the export file.  For all intent & purpose, this would be a
dumb code editor.  Moray's only purpose in this matter would be to insert the code
as entered & specified - correct syntax or not.


Nieminen Mika wrote:

> Alex Magidow <axi### [at] mninternet> wrote:
> : Also, couldn't you just do that in POV-Ray anyway?
>
>   The point is that you could do that while still being able to see the
> wireframe and model with the mouse. You can do it with povray, but you
> can't see the scene before you render it.
>
> : While it might be nice to tweak POV-files, I wouldn't want to have to
> : type in 10 lines of code every time I wanted to replicate an item.
>
>   No-one is saying that every creation/transformation process should be done
> by scripting. A scripting language would be nice to create things not possible
> with the GUI.
>   Ok, suppose that somebody gets the random placement plugin. Now you would
> want to place the objects randomly along a sine-wave. What do you do? Since
> you have no plugin for this, you a) don't do it, or b) make another plugin
> or enhance the existing plugin for this.
>   Oops, now you want the objects along the curve exp(x^2)*cos(x^3)-tan(5).
> What do you do? Another plugin?
>   With a scripting language you just type the function in the right place
> and that's it.
>   Got it?
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:

>   PLugins, plugins, plugins, plugins... Everyone requests plugins. Everyone
> makes plugins. Hundreds of plugins, thousands, millions... And moray grows
> and grows and grows...
>
>   Instead of making a plugin for each simple task (like the random placement
> of objects), wouldn't it be a better idea to allow the user to write little
> povray scripts to do the task instead?

If I could write little POVray scripts, I wouldn't need Moray! :)

Post a reply to this message

I can only speak for myself...I could write little POVray scripts, but I would
still want Moray to visually model my scene.

Adding little scripts could definitely fill the holes in Moray (i.e. inserting
objects from include files, adding if/then statements, placiing objects along the
curve exp(x^2)*cos(x^3)-tan(5), accessing features in patched versions of POVray
etc.)

Simon de Vet wrote:

> If I could write little POVray scripts, I wouldn't need Moray! :)

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
> Alexander Enzmann <xan### [at] mitreorg> wrote:
> : And limit Moray to POV-Ray?  I like the fact that Moray has been opened
> : up to support generic export capabilities.  If you do nothing but
> : POV-Ray scripts, you can't ever take advantage of anything but POV-Ray.
> 
>   Did I say that the scripting should be the only way to create objects?

No - my comment was about, "Instead of making a plugin for each simple
task (like the random placement of objects), wouldn't it be a better
idea to allow the user to write little povray scripts to do the task
instead?".

Scripting is just fine.  However, to keep Moray as general as possible,
writing "povray scripts..." seems limiting.  It seems to me that POV-Ray
itself has provided a way for you to write little scripts as macros. 
Open up MorayPOV.INC in notepad, write your macro, and off you go.

Xander

Post a reply to this message

Alexander Enzmann <xan### [at] mitreorg> wrote:
: Scripting is just fine.  However, to keep Moray as general as possible,
: writing "povray scripts..." seems limiting.

  This sentence looks quite contradictory to me.
  Why _adding_ a scripting feature would be _limiting_ moray? I don't
understand.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

I believe his objection is to adding a *POV-RAY* scripting feature. That
would limit moray's new ability to export to formats other than .pov, which
was, again, 'Xander's original objection, IIRC.

Nieminen Mika wrote:

> Alexander Enzmann <xan### [at] mitreorg> wrote:
> : Scripting is just fine.  However, to keep Moray as general as possible,
> : writing "povray scripts..." seems limiting.
>
>   This sentence looks quite contradictory to me.
>   Why _adding_ a scripting feature would be _limiting_ moray? I don't
> understand.
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/



--
You Know You've Been Raytracing Too Long When:
 You purchase Toy Story for inspiration- Then do a better version for fun.

Post a reply to this message

I think it could be done in such a way as to not be limited to POV.

As simple script-editor-tool that allows you to add a script as an object in
your Moray scene.  The script object could have parameters that tell Moray
where to insert the script within the renderer output.  If the plug-in allowed
for scripts to be written without care for specific syntax, why couldn't that
scripting information be included in the output, regardless of renderer.  And
if the plug-in could allow scripts the be written WITH POV syntax in mind, then
perhaps a plug-in could be written for other renderers as well, such as BMRT.

I don't see how such a plug-in would limit the use of Moray.  If anything, a
generic scripting tool would allow Moray to be that much more useful, and
renderer-specific scripting tools would do that much more again to make Moray
one of the most, if not the most, useful tools in our raytrace toolbox.

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
>   Why _adding_ a scripting feature would be _limiting_ moray? I don't
> understand.
> 

I think it was the "Instead of..." part that worried him.

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message

Nathan Kopp <Nat### [at] koppcom> wrote:
: I think it was the "Instead of..." part that worried him.

  That "instead of making a plugin for each simple task" was not meant as
"remove the plugin feature and replace it with a scripting feature". It was
meant as "if you had a scripting language, you wouldn't be needing to ask
or make a plugin for each simple task but you could just write a little
script to do it instead, thus making moray a lot more powerful tool".
  You could still make plugins if you wanted (and sometimes you have to,
because you can't do _every_ task with the scripting language (for example
some animation plugin or whatever)), but with a scripting language you could
achieve simple tasks easyly, use (povray) features not implemented in moray
(like adding a julia fractal or whatever), etc.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Its not just that- if, for example, someone did write an export to another
renderer, wouldn't it be better to have a general scripting language instead of
a POV-Ray based one? I do not object, one bit, to a general scripting
language(what about something like C? very well documented, and all you'd have
to do is have seperate headers or something. It would allow most people to use,
or write, simple to complex plugins, without worrying about owning M$VC++ and
knowing things like MFC. If it was C++, each new 'plugin' could be a class,
requiring how to save it(not required if it is a normal primitive), how to
represent its wireframe(see the last note), how to export it and what it
is(perhaps in a very generic way. Like a .raw file or something-just objects and
coordinates) and whatever else is needed. Overall, it might be pretty good if it
were a POV-script, but much better if it were something general.

Nieminen Mika wrote:

> Nathan Kopp <Nat### [at] koppcom> wrote:
> : I think it was the "Instead of..." part that worried him.
>
>   That "instead of making a plugin for each simple task" was not meant as
> "remove the plugin feature and replace it with a scripting feature". It was
> meant as "if you had a scripting language, you wouldn't be needing to ask
> or make a plugin for each simple task but you could just write a little
> script to do it instead, thus making moray a lot more powerful tool".
>   You could still make plugins if you wanted (and sometimes you have to,
> because you can't do _every_ task with the scripting language (for example
> some animation plugin or whatever)), but with a scripting language you could
> achieve simple tasks easyly, use (povray) features not implemented in moray
> (like adding a julia fractal or whatever), etc.
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/



--
You Know You've Been Raytracing Too Long When:
 You purchase Toy Story for inspiration- Then do a better version for fun.

Post a reply to this message

Alex Magidow <axi### [at] mninternet> wrote:
: Its not just that- if, for example, someone did write an export to another
: renderer, wouldn't it be better to have a general scripting language instead of
: a POV-Ray based one?

  How do you use povray features not implemented in moray (for example some
objects, colefax's include files, etc)?

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
> Alex Magidow <axi### [at] mninternet> wrote:
> : Its not just that- if, for example, someone did write an export to another
> : renderer, wouldn't it be better to have a general scripting language instead of
> : a POV-Ray based one?
> 
>   How do you use povray features not implemented in moray (for example some
> objects, colefax's include files, etc)?

  The one question I have not heard addressed yet is if you expect Moray to
display the results of the written Pov script. This would of course require
Moray to have a Pov language parser added to it and Lutz has already mentioned
he does not want to spend the time to add one. You might as well edit the pov
file directly if you can't visualize it in Moray.

-- 
Ken Tyler
  
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm

Post a reply to this message

Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
:   The one question I have not heard addressed yet is if you expect Moray to
: display the results of the written Pov script.

  My original suggestion was that you could tell moray how to create the
wireframe for the object in script comments or something.
  Moray could also understand simple #declares of floats and #whiles.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
> Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
> :   The one question I have not heard addressed yet is if you expect Moray to
> : display the results of the written Pov script.
> 
>   My original suggestion was that you could tell moray how to create the
> wireframe for the object in script comments or something.
>   Moray could also understand simple #declares of floats and #whiles.
 
...which equates to turning Moray into a language parser instead of a simple wire
frame modelling program. I not arguing it's potential I am just pointing out the
reality of what you propose. It would make everyone happy who wishes that Moray
could read pov files directly and between you me and Lutz we certainly know how
many requests there have been for that.

-- 
Ken Tyler
  
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:

>   The one question I have not heard addressed yet is if you expect Moray to
> display the results of the written Pov script. This would of course require
> Moray to have a Pov language parser added to it and Lutz has already mentioned
> he does not want to spend the time to add one. You might as well edit the pov
> file directly if you can't visualize it in Moray.

I did address that question earlier - sort of.   The way I see this working, is that
when you chose the Script plugin object from the create menu, a simple wireframe would
be placed in your scene to represent the Script object.  That wireframe doesn't
necessarily need to look like the results of your script.  It would simply act as a
visual cue so you can access the script later for future editing.  Perhaps the plugin
would allow you to choose your wireframe representation - cube, sphere, cylinder, UDO,
etc.

For example, if you wanted to place a Julia fractal in a Moray scene, you would create
a Script object, add the necessary code (including all transformations, bounding
boxes,
textures, etc), choose where in the output renderer code to insert the script, &
transform the wireframe to taste.  Please note that this wireframe would only act as a
visual cue & would not in any way play a part in the actual location, rotation or size
of any object created within the script.

With this kind of ability, you could access any object within Include files, input
values beyond what Moray currently allows (values outside of 0.0 - 1.0), and most
importantly - access features within patched versions of POV.

I like modelling & staging my scenes with Moray.  The big thing that I don't like
about
Moray is that if I want to add anything that Moray doesn't currently handle, I need to
edit the output POV scene file each & everytime that I make a change to the Moray
model.  Being able to add these scripts directly into Moray would greatly reduce the
time & effort required to re-add all of the extra scripting each time I tweek a light
or a texture.

Post a reply to this message

Or some godly individual could use their programming prowess to work with parpov and
create a pov2mdl library that actually works for version 3.0(and higher, if you
forget about media/halo/atmosphere stuff)

Ken wrote:

> Nieminen Mika wrote:
> >
> > Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
> > :   The one question I have not heard addressed yet is if you expect Moray to
> > : display the results of the written Pov script.
> >
> >   My original suggestion was that you could tell moray how to create the
> > wireframe for the object in script comments or something.
> >   Moray could also understand simple #declares of floats and #whiles.
>
> ...which equates to turning Moray into a language parser instead of a simple wire
> frame modelling program. I not arguing it's potential I am just pointing out the
> reality of what you propose. It would make everyone happy who wishes that Moray
> could read pov files directly and between you me and Lutz we certainly know how
> many requests there have been for that.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm



--
You Know You've Been Raytracing Too Long When:
 You purchase Toy Story for inspiration- Then do a better version for fun.

Post a reply to this message

Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
: ...which equates to turning Moray into a language parser instead of a simple wire
: frame modelling program. I not arguing it's potential I am just pointing out the
: reality of what you propose. It would make everyone happy who wishes that Moray
: could read pov files directly and between you me and Lutz we certainly know how
: many requests there have been for that.

  I didn't suggest adding a pov-file reader to moray. I just suggested
supporting a couple of commands like #declare ind=5; and #while(i<10).
The rest could be simple object creation commands that you put into comments.
Actually those float identifiers and while-loops could also be in comments.
  Something like this:

#declare ind=0;       //M: i=0;
#while(ind<100);      //M: while(i<100) {
  julia_fractal       //M: cylinder { <0,-2,0>,<0,2,0>,1;
  { (some julia parameters)
    ...
    translate x*ind   //M: translate <i,0,0>; }
  }
  #declare ind=ind+2; //M: i=i+2; }
#end

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Hi Tony Vigil, you recently wrote in moray.win:

> For example, if you wanted to place a Julia fractal in a Moray scene, you would
create
> a Script object, add the necessary code (including all transformations, bounding
boxes,
> textures, etc), choose where in the output renderer code to insert the script, &
> transform the wireframe to taste.  Please note that this wireframe would only act as
a
> visual cue & would not in any way play a part in the actual location, rotation or
size
> of any object created within the script.

But this is exactly what the User-defined Object is designed for! You
tell Moray in an UDO file what the object looks like and you write the
POV code in the corresponding INC file. Do you want an integrated
editor to write the code?

Also remember that you can tweak textures in the scenes INC file and
*not* have Moray export that texture  (and thus overwrite your
changes) by changing the $MRY$ marker with the name of the texture to
$MRX$.

- Lutz
  email : lut### [at] stmuccom
  Web   : http://www.stmuc.com/moray

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
> Alex Magidow <axi### [at] mninternet> wrote:
> : Its not just that- if, for example, someone did write an export to another
> : renderer, wouldn't it be better to have a general scripting language instead of
> : a POV-Ray based one?
> 
>   How do you use povray features not implemented in moray (for example some
> objects, colefax's include files, etc)?

Your questions lead me to believe that you haven't explored all of what
Moray already offers for POV-Ray.  Here are some thoughts...

You can put definitions/include files into MorayPOV.inc (by default in
the main Moray directory).  This doesn't give you any sort of visual
representation of the object/texture/whatever, but makes it possible
(with every version of Moray back to the DOS days) to add unique things
to all of your scene files.

For things specific to an individual scene, you pull down the menu
Scene|Settings,  select the "includes" tab, and enter the .inc files you
plan to use.  Since these .inc files can contain anything you want, you
can use them set the variables for whatever other .include files you
might want to use.

If you want a more general capability, write a really small scene
interface that adds information to the POV-Ray .ini file.  In the
PrintEvent(...) part of the interface, you respond to the event
MRY_NTC_END_POVINI by writing text to the file that is being built.

If you want even more functionality, start writing object interfaces for
the things you really care about.  This is, of course, why Moray has a
plugin interface.

Xander

Post a reply to this message

Lutz Kretzschmar wrote:

> But this is exactly what the User-defined Object is designed for! You
> tell Moray in an UDO file what the object looks like and you write the
> POV code in the corresponding INC file.

DOHHHHH!  Good Point!

Now for a stupid POV-specific question - can INC files access other INC files, such as
macros
with parameters?

Post a reply to this message

Tony Vigil wrote:
> 
> Lutz Kretzschmar wrote:
> 
> > But this is exactly what the User-defined Object is designed for! You
> > tell Moray in an UDO file what the object looks like and you write the
> > POV code in the corresponding INC file.
> 
> DOHHHHH!  Good Point!
> 
> Now for a stupid POV-specific question - can INC files access other INC files, such
as macros
> with parameters?

That's what inc files are for...

-- 
Ken Tyler
  
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm

Post a reply to this message