OK. Before uploading beta 1.7, I would prefer to have a (language) check 
on the documentation that is, imo, in a fairly final stage.

@Bald Eagle: Bill, may I ask you to go through this latest version?

Note: I have abandoned a couple of older granites (CanadianPink and 
IndiaBlack) which are too close to other provided granites to be of 
interest.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'granite_21 - documentation.pdf' (1294 KB)

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> OK. Before uploading beta 1.7, I would prefer to have a (language) check
> on the documentation that is, imo, in a fairly final stage.
>
> @Bald Eagle: Bill, may I ask you to go through this latest version?


Just DL'd and will give it a read-through later this afternoon.

It's been a long haul on this project since its inception, and you've put a lot
of work into this.  :)

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:

> @Bald Eagle: Bill, may I ask you to go through this latest version?

I think I covered everything I could think of.
Will you email me - we should discuss an immediate application, pre-release.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'granitedoc2.pdf' (57 KB)

Op 11/07/2021 om 23:08 schreef Bald Eagle:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> 
>> @Bald Eagle: Bill, may I ask you to go through this latest version?
> 
> I think I covered everything I could think of.
> Will you email me - we should discuss an immediate application, pre-release.
> 

Very good, and thanks. I need to go through this with a fine comb indeed 
now.

Yes, I think you need my address for further discussions. A little 
rebus: thomdegfullstop01atgmailperiodcom  :-)

One thing which has been worrying me a bit is that the use of mixed 
arrays just cuts backward compatibility, starting with 3.7. I have to 
test with the newest beta by clipka & friends yet, to be sure about even 
official 3.8.

However, it might be a good idea to start fresh as it were. ;-)

Which makes me think of that other 3.8 feature you mentioned earlier 
about keeping declarations between renders (circumventing #undef)? 
Remind me of its name as I forgot it. It might be good to include it 
under these circumstances.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:

> Very good, and thanks. I need to go through this with a fine comb indeed
> now.
>
> Yes, I think you need my address for further discussions. A little
> rebus:

Ah yes.  !verbis sed 'rebus'  Very good, sir.

I shall email you this time zone's afternoon, the !syzygy of events permitting.

Post a reply to this message

Am 12.07.2021 um 08:21 schrieb Thomas de Groot:

> One thing which has been worrying me a bit is that the use of mixed 
> arrays just cuts backward compatibility, starting with 3.7. I have to 
> test with the newest beta by clipka & friends yet, to be sure about even 
> official 3.8.

Mixed arrays should still work; they were introduced quite a while 
before the rollback point.

> Which makes me think of that other 3.8 feature you mentioned earlier 
> about keeping declarations between renders (circumventing #undef)? 

There's no such official v3.8 feature.

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:

> > Which makes me think of that other 3.8 feature you mentioned earlier
> > about keeping declarations between renders (circumventing #undef)?
>
> There's no such official v3.8 feature.

I *think* what he was referencing was this:

http://news.povray.org/web.60b43edf388d0b7a1f9dae3025979125%40news.povray.org

Not identifier values that persist between _renders_ but between sequential
invocations of the texture-defining macro in the same scene.

Post a reply to this message

Op 12-7-2021 om 13:23 schreef Bald Eagle:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> 
>>> Which makes me think of that other 3.8 feature you mentioned earlier
>>> about keeping declarations between renders (circumventing #undef)?
>>
>> There's no such official v3.8 feature.
> 
> I *think* what he was referencing was this:
> 
> http://news.povray.org/web.60b43edf388d0b7a1f9dae3025979125%40news.povray.org
> 
> Not identifier values that persist between _renders_ but between sequential
> invocations of the texture-defining macro in the same scene.
> 

"optional" that is the one.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message