Wasn't it Simen Kvaal who wrote:
>The thought struck me too, but I have so little expirience with such things
>you know.
>
>There are several other things that I find odd, too. Such as: What's the
>difference between:
>
>    #declare Tooth = function { niceonehere }
>    isosurface { Tooth(x, y, z) }
>
>and
>
>    #declare Tooth = function { niceonehere }
>    isosurface { Tooth }

My experiments show that the first one defaults to method 2 and the
second to method 1.



>
>Another one:
>
>isosurface {
>        function {
>                Tooth(x, y, z) + 0*SomeDistortion(x, y, z)
>        }
>}
>versus:
>
>isosurface {
>        function {
>                Tooth(x, y, z) //+ 0*SomeDistortion(x, y, z)
>        }
>}
>
>(see my other post.)

Those both default to method 2,  but you didn't use that syntax in your
other post, you used 

 isosurface {
        function {
                <expression> //+ (0.00*Noize)
        }
 }

which defaults to method 1 when the // is present. ("Noize" is undefined
in the version of Megapov I'm using (0.3)).

-- 
Mike Williams * ##
Gentleman of Leisure

Post a reply to this message

>>
>>    #declare Tooth = function { niceonehere }
>>    isosurface { Tooth }
>
>My experiments show that the first one defaults to method 2 and the
>second to method 1.


Yes, but when I declare my own function and _don't_ pass x, y and z as
paramaters, what then?

>which defaults to method 1 when the // is present. ("Noize" is undefined
>in the version of Megapov I'm using (0.3)).
>

Noize was jus a name I invented at that time. The point was that I get
different results using the // and _not_ using them! Weird!

Simen.

Post a reply to this message