 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/23/2010 2:26 PM, clipka wrote:
> Not really.
>
> There is a feature to allow other users and/or developers to comment on
> bugs & feature request, but this is primarily intended for providing
> additional information, or feedback on the current status. For proper
> discussions, it lacks the necessary publicity. (When was the last time
> you just browsed the bugtracker just to see if there was some
> interesting discussion going on in some of the entries?)
>
> As someone else already said, the POV-Ray community is strongest in the
> newsgroups.
True, but as you can see threads here have difficulty staying on-topic.
--
http://isometricland.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
SharkD wrote:
> True, but as you can see threads here have difficulty staying on-topic.
>
Unless human nature has changed while I wasn't paying attention, all discussions
have difficulty staying on topic. I believe this is why Robert invented Rules
of Order...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis <nam### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > Of course the *major* problem here is: Which tesselation algorithm to use,
> > and how to implement it? And who is going to implement it?
> oh, the last one is easy: I vote for the pov-team. :)
As if they didn't have their hands full of work already...
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> No, as per the bug reporting instructions which say, "Only report one
>> bug or request one feature per task."
>
> You know whom you are talking to, don't you? - This reminds me of my
> favourite quote: "The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
> I wonder if this also applies to writing? Hmm...
Wouldn't it be more productive to try and address the cause of the ambiguity
(ie add Chris' point about grouping similar requests to the bug tracker
instructions) rather than calling someone stupid who is trying to help
improve POV?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/25/2010 3:52 AM, scott wrote:
> Wouldn't it be more productive to try and address the cause of the
> ambiguity (ie add Chris' point about grouping similar requests to the
> bug tracker instructions) rather than calling someone stupid who is
> trying to help improve POV?
>
>
You are not showing sufficient timorousness toward the master!
--
http://isometricland.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25.06.10 09:52, scott wrote:
>>> No, as per the bug reporting instructions which say, "Only report one
>>> bug or request one feature per task."
>>
>> You know whom you are talking to, don't you? - This reminds me of my
>> favourite quote: "The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
>> I wonder if this also applies to writing? Hmm...
>
> Wouldn't it be more productive to try and address the cause of the
> ambiguity (ie add Chris' point about grouping similar requests to the
> bug tracker instructions) rather than calling someone stupid who is
> trying to help improve POV?
No, it would not be more productive because SharkD's goal is not to help,
but to game the system: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AGAME>. How
do I conclude his main goal is causing disruption? - He has used the tactic
of malicious compliance after he was prohibited from vandalizing the Wiki.
Next he moved to the bug tracker. As such, his "help" simply is not wanted
because he is not serious in helping the POV-Ray community, but rather to
poison it.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/25/2010 2:20 PM, Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> No, it would not be more productive because SharkD's goal is not to
> help, but to game the system:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AGAME>. How do I conclude his
> main goal is causing disruption? - He has used the tactic of malicious
> compliance after he was prohibited from vandalizing the Wiki. Next he
> moved to the bug tracker. As such, his "help" simply is not wanted
> because he is not serious in helping the POV-Ray community, but rather
> to poison it.
>
> Thorsten
THAT is what I consider to be malicious! WTF, gaming the system?? You
seriously think I have anything to gain by doing this?
And I was specifically directed /to/ the bugtracker, not by my own decision.
It sounds more to me like YOU are gaming the system, using your position
as a leader in the POV community to abuse people around you.
--
http://isometricland.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/19/2010 8:42 PM, stbenge wrote:
> You left out camera pigment, projection pigment, explicit image filename
> output for animations (for stuff like CA), last image buffer access... I
> guess I should make a few requests of my own. If I could patch POV-Ray
> myself, I would!
Are these MegaPOV features? I haven't ever used MegaPOV.
--
http://isometricland.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I've compiled a list of points made here and in the thread over in
p.general:
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:POV-Ray_Feature_Requests
Is this satisfactory?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
SharkD wrote:
> It sounds more to me like YOU are gaming the system, using your position
> as a leader in the POV community to abuse people around you.
(The sounds of munching popcorn ensue.)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
C# - a language whose greatest drawback
is that it's best implementation comes
from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.06.2010 20:20, schrieb Thorsten Froehlich:
> No, it would not be more productive because SharkD's goal is not to
> help, but to game the system:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AGAME>. How do I conclude his
> main goal is causing disruption? - He has used the tactic of malicious
> compliance after he was prohibited from vandalizing the Wiki. Next he
> moved to the bug tracker. As such, his "help" simply is not wanted
> because he is not serious in helping the POV-Ray community, but rather
> to poison it.
Hm... so, for instance, summarizing the (more constructive) results of
this discussion on the Wiki is no help?
I prefer to disagree.
And as we're on it inferring a person's motives from their actions alone
and right in their face: I'm more in for "don't assume malice where
stupidity will suffice".
(Sorry Mike, just wording it this way for the sake of the quote.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.06.2010 23:18, schrieb SharkD:
> I've compiled a list of points made here and in the thread over in
> p.general:
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:POV-Ray_Feature_Requests
>
> Is this satisfactory?
Looks like a good summary to me. While a lot of it are actually quotes,
I think they're well-picked, and you did a good job at "polishing" them up.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/25/2010 9:25 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.06.2010 23:18, schrieb SharkD:
>> I've compiled a list of points made here and in the thread over in
>> p.general:
>>
>> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:POV-Ray_Feature_Requests
>>
>> Is this satisfactory?
>
> Looks like a good summary to me. While a lot of it are actually quotes,
> I think they're well-picked, and you did a good job at "polishing" them up.
Thank you!
--
http://isometricland.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
SharkD wrote:
> On 6/19/2010 8:42 PM, stbenge wrote:
>> You left out camera pigment, projection pigment, explicit image filename
>> output for animations (for stuff like CA), last image buffer access... I
>> guess I should make a few requests of my own. If I could patch POV-Ray
>> myself, I would!
>
> Are these MegaPOV features? I haven't ever used MegaPOV.
Only the camera and projection pigments are.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2010-06-19 19:29, SharkD a écrit :
> If you search for tasks by SharkD at the bug tracker you'll see a bunch
> of feature request I've made.
>
> http://bugs.povray.org/
>
> Here's a list if you don't want to do the search:
>
> Option to render pixels randomly, or in Nth pixel
Why?
Maybe try with the crand statement in the finish, applied to the whole
scene. Use a large value for the crand.
> Native support for mesh-based surface approximations
Slow!
Why? To create the mesh, you need to evaluate the base object, about as
long as rendering it, maybe even longer than rendering. When you render
the object, you only render the visible part of it. When you convert it
to a mesh, you also need to evaluate all the parts that you don't see.
Then, you need to render the mesh, fast part.
Then, the generated mesh will take a large amount of memory and you may
not beneficiate fron instancing the mesh, whitch, in turn, can force the
use of the swap file and that's SLOWWW!
A box renders very fast and take a small amount of memory. It's mesh
version would take about the same time to render, and take the memory
needed for it's 12 triangles in addition to the material used and the
transform matrix.
A sphere is defined as a center point, a radius and it's material and
maybe a transformation matrix if it's unevenly scaled or rotated. An
acceptable mesh version can easily need over 100 triangles, and any
transpate will need a transform matrix.
Converting an isosurface to a mesh imply scaning it's whole surface,
even the back parts and parts hiden by other objects.
> Subdivision support
Interesting
> String concatenation operator
This one is available in the current betas for some times now.
#declare String=String1+String2;
With 3.6, there is the concat(String1, String2,...)
>
> I'd like to see some thoughts/comments on these requests.
>
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.06.2010 19:48, schrieb Alain:
>> String concatenation operator
> This one is available in the current betas for some times now.
> #declare String=String1+String2;
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but did you actually try?
What the 3.7 betas have by now is string /comparison/ operators.
Concatenation is still only supported via the concat() function.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2010-06-26 16:00, clipka a écrit :
> Am 26.06.2010 19:48, schrieb Alain:
>
>>> String concatenation operator
>> This one is available in the current betas for some times now.
>> #declare String=String1+String2;
>
> I'm sorry to disappoint you, but did you actually try?
>
> What the 3.7 betas have by now is string /comparison/ operators.
> Concatenation is still only supported via the concat() function.
Oups :(
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>> No, as per the bug reporting instructions which say, "Only report one
>>>> bug or request one feature per task."
>>>
>>> You know whom you are talking to, don't you? - This reminds me of my
>>> favourite quote: "The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
>>> I wonder if this also applies to writing? Hmm...
>>
>> Wouldn't it be more productive to try and address the cause of the
>> ambiguity (ie add Chris' point about grouping similar requests to the
>> bug tracker instructions) rather than calling someone stupid who is
>> trying to help improve POV?
>
> No, it would not be more productive because SharkD's goal is not to help,
What does his goal have to do with it? If you'd updated the bug tracker
instructions with Chris' suggestion rather than writing a driveling reply
about SharkD we might be getting somewhere! Hint: Updating the instructions
will make it clearer for future users, calling someone stupid won't (in fact
it might even drive people away from making suggestions)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28.06.10 15:05, scott wrote:
>> No, it would not be more productive because SharkD's goal is not to help,
>
> What does his goal have to do with it?
The goal to provide all of these resources is to share knowledge for the
mutual benefit of users and developers of POV-Ray. They do not exist for
personal entertainment of other interests (exception: the newsgroup
povray.off-topic).
> If you'd updated the bug tracker
> instructions with Chris' suggestion rather than writing a driveling
> reply about SharkD we might be getting somewhere! Hint: Updating the
> instructions will make it clearer for future users, calling someone
> stupid won't
Writing explicit rules to cover every possible case, or every case that ever
comes up, is a pure waste of time and the net result is nobody will read
them. I think I made the point clear on how explicit rules could be ;-)
And there is a difference between pointing that out to someone and calling
them stupid. However, resorting to name-calling as a response is a dead-end
solution!
> (in fact it might even drive people away from making suggestions)
And yes, a community is not about accepting someone who refuses to fit in.
Common sense suggests that making suggestions is way different from stuffing
them into everybody's face in every possible way.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
