> Will your set of macros be able of simulating wind and gravity and things
> like that?

Huh! No. (Not yet?)
Parsing time is 1 1/2 h on a 500MHz PIII. This is the PC I (illegally) used
in my office. At home I have a PRE-MMX Pentium 200Mhz.... I guesstimate
(according to previous rendering comparisons) that parsing time would be at
least 5-8 hours. Each frame... All is done in POV macros no external
programs. I once thought about porting to Delphi but this would cut my
chances of developing the code to 1/3. Simply undoable. It is just a set of
handy (plant-related) tools. Not a simulation prog.

However, beside the parsing time it would be rather easy to implement. At
least a "fake" simulation and not really a fully computed one. Manipulating
the stem(s) and the arrangement of the leaves is very easy and modular. But
I could never try it out! .-)

regards
SY

Post a reply to this message

> > party products. You may call me crazy ;-)
>
> No, but if you want others to use your toolkit too you should take care of
> making it easy to use and write some documentation, if people need to dig
> through the whole code to customize the parameters there won't be many who
> will use it.

Thank you for the explanation :-)
Now I know what I did wrong the last 10 years I was busy as software
developer :-)))
Just kidding.

Beside that I don't expect that anyone will use these macros (except
myself), as separate Windows-native code applications exist for shure which
make possible better results within few seconds....
It doesn't make sense to write these macros beside the fact that I can be
proud of myself that I managed a challenge which wouldn't exist if I'd use
ready-for-use code *g*
See?

> And even if you write things yourself it's often useful to have a look at
> similar tools that have previously been made.

It is my speciality NOT to look at others code. Re-inventing the weel is fun
and prevents of making the same mistakes while it simultaneously gives the
chance of making completely new ones! *lol*

have fun,

regards
SY

Post a reply to this message

> > do you remember the fern I posted some weeks ago?
>
> Yes

Good *g*

> perhaps you can be interested in
> http://www.mcs.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibnat.html

Very interesting summary about Fibonacci numbers. Thanks for posting.
regards
SY

Post a reply to this message

news:3c86337a@news.povray.org...
> Hi again,

> to create trees, grass or similar. However, I like to WRITE the code and
> MODEL manually rather than just USING macros or using some 2nd, 3rd or 4th
> party products. You may call me crazy ;-)

Sometimes, reinveinting the wheel can be most amusing and intellectually
challenging, I think.

Congratulations on those excellent ferns!

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

I think that porting it to delphi/pascal or c when the macros are 100%
finished wouldn't be a very difficult thing to do (providing that you don't
use the trace() functionalities). If I'd ever find the time/energy/appetite
to do that I can do that (only with your permission of course).

--
Apache
http://geitenkaas.dns2go.com/experiments/
apa### [at] yahoocom

Post a reply to this message

Reinventing the wheel is a nice thing to do. Especially when those new
wheels turn out to be better ones.  ;-)

--
Apache
http://geitenkaas.dns2go.com/experiments/
apa### [at] yahoocom

Post a reply to this message

> I think that porting it to delphi/pascal or c when the macros are 100%
> finished wouldn't be a very difficult thing to do (providing that you
don't

No, I don't think so either.

> use the trace() functionalities). If I'd ever find the
time/energy/appetite
> to do that I can do that (only with your permission of course).

Not at all. The macros are very simple in syntax and run even on 3.1g. I
just used megaPov due to the memory macros which speed up things
significantly.

Feel free to modify the code (when I posted it). However, there is a
disadvantage in using anything else than POV macros. Since it is only a
toolset you need to write some code to model your own plants. On a ported
version you'd need C,C++, Java or Delphi or whatever to do this. Macros can
be used by anyone who uses PoV.

With the time I expect to have a small set of plants ready for use. But
whenever I create a new plant it would have to be ported again (beside some
enhancements in the toolset or new macros).....

Developing is not the difficult part. The challenge is to maintain the
software and to keep it alive while improving it at the same time. :)

regards
SY

Post a reply to this message

> Reinventing the wheel is a nice thing to do. Especially when those new
> wheels turn out to be better ones.  ;-)

*g*
at least my wheel will probably not better but at least *different*.
Somehow.

regards
SY

Post a reply to this message

> Sometimes, reinveinting the wheel can be most amusing and intellectually
> challenging, I think.

Indeed.

> Congratulations on those excellent ferns!

Thanks a lot.
Today I'll fix the bug in the wrinkles and enhance the leaf's stems. They
aren't flexible enough yet.

regards
SY

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 23:09:29 +0100, "Apache"
<apa### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

>Reinventing the wheel is a nice thing to do. Especially when those new
>wheels turn out to be better ones.  ;-)

I hope you don't mean "better" as in what I did with my mass-spring
model -- invented a triangular wheel to improve the square one by
removing one bump per revolution :)


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message