POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : Bug reports and files attachments - new beta6 doc clause Server Time
13 Aug 2024 15:26:40 EDT (-0400)
  Bug reports and files attachments - new beta6 doc clause (Message 1 to 1 of 1)  
From: Philippe Debar
Subject: Bug reports and files attachments - new beta6 doc clause
Date: 28 Aug 1998 17:06:36
Message: <35e70dcc.0@news.povray.org>
Bug reports... you could have said that sooner:

from beta5 documentation:
>A complete description of the problem and what led up to
>it. It will make it a lot easier to track down if you can
>include a scene file that will cause the problem. If the
>file is large, try removing parts until you have the
>minimum scene file that will cause the problem.

>Do not send large files by email unless requested.


>most likely that your report will be ignored.



from beta6 documentation:
>A complete description of the problem and what led up to
>it. It will make it a lot easier to track down if you can
>include a scene file that will cause the problem. If the
>file is large, try removing parts until you have the
>minimum scene file that will cause the problem.
>

>most likely that your report will be ignored.
>Finally, do not send files by email unless requested.

>Repeat,
>
>DO NOT SEND FILES BY EMAIL UNLESS REQUESTED.
>
>Sending unrequested file attachments is the single most
>common mistake make by persons submitting bug reports and
>is GUARANTEED to cause your report to be deleted - unseen
>- by our email software. We access our mail via modem and
>do not want large file attachments sent to us. If we want
>a file sent to us we will request it and arrange a FTP
>drop-off point for it.


Well, that's quite different isnt'it? I guess it really means
'do include a file scene (or you will most likely be ignored)
in the mail, but not as an attached file (or you are
guaranteed to be ignored)'. Is this correct?

In the meantime, I sent some bug reports. I tried to
provide the smallest (attached) file scene. I have no way
of knowing if they were read or deleted. So, here is a
summary:


* Shadowless lights do not produce phong nor specular
  highlights. Is this a bug or a feature? In any case, it
  is undocumented. A no_highlight keyword is interresting.

* Some pattern density function give grey media weird colors.
  Namely : agate, bozo, marble, radial and wood.

* Using a #if statement like this:
    #declare my_texture=
    texture{layer_1}
    #if (flag)
      texture{layer_2}
    #end
  causes an error: object or directive expected but texture found instead.
  A simple workaround is:
    #declare my_texture=
    #if (flag)
      texture{layer_1}
      texture{layer_2}
    #else
      texture{layer_1}
    #end

* ambient 0 on all objects prevents radiosity rendering. Outputs a normal
  rendering, as below.

* With my radiosity scenes, POV-Ray render +qr images correctly, untill
  I interrupt one rendering. After what, it does not render radiosity
  anymore. It mimics the visual process : two pass rendering whith a
  kind of mosaic preview and the wishy-washy percentages. But the output
  is a normal rendering, at the normal speed.
  The example scene file rad2.pov does not cause the bug in any case. But
  it is affected by it once it starts. Restarting POV always get it back
  on track. I tried rendering the same scene with -qr, closing the file,
  rendering other files (either +qr or -qr)... Sometimes it works,
  sometimes it doesn't. I did not find any regular pattern. Sometimes
  POV just recover with time (typically when I leave the computer idle
  for half an hour). Sometimes the bug appears even though I did not
  interrupt any rendering. The first radiosity rendering is always right.
  (I admit this one had a quite large file attached: 9.17Kb).



Good day, everybody



Philippe


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.