|
 |
On 7/28/21 11:38 AM, jr wrote:
> hi,
>
> William F Pokorny <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
...
>> because the default format strings has a 'Z' on the end where I suspect
>> ' %Z' was intended. In the povr branch I changed to ' %z' as I think the
>> time offset more general.
>>
>> v3.8 (povr) default -> 2021-07-28 08:15:15 -0400
>
> is this new? because does not work for me, see below.
Relatively, I guess. Looks like I updated this with a commit on:
Date: Fri Jun 11 06:18:44 2021 -0400
where I changed datetime() to optionally generate a time accounting for
the local daylight savings time datetime(-100000) after getting myself
tangled up due the generated datetime() string not aligning to my local
-dst adjusted - computer time. Only %z %Z appear to be dst aware with
datetime() otherwise.
So... The Z to ' %z' is an update not yet published.
> also, while on 'povr', I
> ran into trouble viewing font glyphs >= chr(256).
True my text{} isn't POV-Ray's exactly... Is this something unique to
the povr branch? Off the top of my head, this likely normal unless using
a unicode string specifications.
---
Aside:
In povr, I'm leaning in a direction of eliminating the text{} object...
Or, at least, not further updating it.
Christoph has been playing with freetype and making the text{} internals
prisms as you know. I'm thinking perhaps all characters/glyphs should
just be include-able objects only where we'd use SDL macros to do all
the placements for a string -- get POV-Ray, at the core, completely out
of the text formatting game and push that sort of thing into SDL.
If you look at the text oriented macros shipped today - like
Circle_Text(), for example, they are actually doing a lot of work to
pull apart text{} strings character by character. When I do isosurface
stuff with text{} strings, I often do the same to get to single
'characters' for better performance. Effectively, pulling text{} objects
apart - or internally doing this - for most work is a painfully
backwards way to approach things in my opinion.
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
