 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
While poving arround I found the word "steps" highlightet as a reserved keyword
in my editor window. There is no entry in the reference nor in the helpfiles. It
makes me courious. Is it a secret feature or obsolete or something in between.
Thought, could be an usefull ini option for animations.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/12/2017 21:04, Kontemplator wrote:
> While poving arround I found the word "steps" highlightet as a reserved keyword
> in my editor window. There is no entry in the reference nor in the helpfiles. It
> makes me courious. Is it a secret feature or obsolete or something in between.
> Thought, could be an usefull ini option for animations.
>
>
From the included help file:
3.3.2.6.3 The for DirectiveA new #for loop construct is now available
for simple loops incrementing Identifier from Start to End (inclusive)
with the given Step size. The default Step size is +1.0.
The syntax is:
#for (Identifier, Start, End [, Step])
//...
#end
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aol com> wrote:
> On 04/12/2017 21:04, Kontemplator wrote:
> > While poving arround I found the word "steps" highlightet as a reserved keyword
> > in my editor window. There is no entry in the reference nor in the helpfiles. It
> > makes me courious. Is it a secret feature or obsolete or something in between.
> > Thought, could be an usefull ini option for animations.
> >
> >
>
> From the included help file:
>
> 3.3.2.6.3 The for DirectiveA new #for loop construct is now available
> for simple loops incrementing Identifier from Start to End (inclusive)
> with the given Step size. The default Step size is +1.0.
>
> The syntax is:
>
> #for (Identifier, Start, End [, Step])
> //...
> #end
Nope. Nice try though.
"Step" is a scalar value, not a reserved keyword.
Thank you for playing the home version of POV-Ray Help Mystery.
Apparently you're playing this because you have no .... Clue. :D
#Hasbro
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 04.12.2017 um 22:04 schrieb Kontemplator:
> While poving arround I found the word "steps" highlightet as a reserved keyword
> in my editor window. There is no entry in the reference nor in the helpfiles. It
> makes me courious. Is it a secret feature or obsolete or something in between.
> Thought, could be an usefull ini option for animations.
A curious find.
Indeed, the parser does recognize the keyword "steps" as a token
(STEPS_TOKEN), but this token is never actually tested for, i.e. it
doesn't do anything in any context.
The keyword appears to have been introduced in v3.5.0 (it was absent in
v3.1g but present in v3.5.0c) without ever having been actually used
(verified for v3.5.0c, v3.6.0, v3.6.1 and v3.8.0-alpha).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 04.12.2017 um 23:46 schrieb clipka:
> Am 04.12.2017 um 22:04 schrieb Kontemplator:
>> While poving arround I found the word "steps" highlightet as a reserved keyword
>> in my editor window. There is no entry in the reference nor in the helpfiles. It
>> makes me courious. Is it a secret feature or obsolete or something in between.
>> Thought, could be an usefull ini option for animations.
>
> A curious find.
>
> Indeed, the parser does recognize the keyword "steps" as a token
> (STEPS_TOKEN), but this token is never actually tested for, i.e. it
> doesn't do anything in any context.
>
> The keyword appears to have been introduced in v3.5.0 (it was absent in
> v3.1g but present in v3.5.0c) without ever having been actually used
> (verified for v3.5.0c, v3.6.0, v3.6.1 and v3.8.0-alpha).
In a related note, there are a few other unused tokens, but they're all
single special characters:
@ (AT_TOKEN)
` (BACK_QUOTE_TOKEN)
\ (BACK_SLASH_TOKEN)
$ (DOLLAR_TOKEN)
^ (HAT_TOKEN)
% (PERCENT_TOKEN)
' (SINGLE_QUOTE_TOKEN)
~ (TILDE_TOKEN)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/04/2017 05:46 PM, clipka wrote:
>
> A curious find.
>
> Indeed, the parser does recognize the keyword "steps" as a token
> (STEPS_TOKEN), but this token is never actually tested for, i.e. it
> doesn't do anything in any context.
>
> The keyword appears to have been introduced in v3.5.0 (it was absent in
> v3.1g but present in v3.5.0c) without ever having been actually used
> (verified for v3.5.0c, v3.6.0, v3.6.1 and v3.8.0-alpha).
>
Who added it?
---
dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Is it a secret feature....
Yes. Look no further. I've already said too much already.
The bicubic_patch has v_steps and u_steps.
http://news.povray.org/povray.general/message/%3C374EC19C.39285F01%40aol.com%3E/#%3C374EC19C.39285F01%40aol.com%3E
I'm wondering if there's some other primitive that might have been under
consideration for implementation, or an existing one that might have benefited
from the addition of a keyword...
Could be so many things.
http://wiki.povray.org/content/HowTo:Turn_a_continuous_function_into_a_stepped_function
http://news.povray.org/povray.general/thread/%3C44b79dae$1@news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=373263&toff=1550
http://news.povray.org/povray.unofficial.patches/thread/%3C39A30BD5.5E049847@club-internet.fr%3E/
http://news.povray.org/povray.news-submissions/thread/%3C40a14e8c%40news.povray.org%3E/
OH - HEY! is "step" a CAD file format?
http://news.povray.org/povray.advanced-users/thread/%3Cweb.53bc16a761a21688e9033540@news.povray.org%3E/
http://news.povray.org/povray.tools.general/thread/%3Cweb.4b7a2608fde57a8dda6353d60%40news.povray.org%3E/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 17-12-04 à 18:59, Bald Eagle a écrit :
>
>> Is it a secret feature....
>
> Yes. Look no further. I've already said too much already.
>
>
>
>
>
> The bicubic_patch has v_steps and u_steps.
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.general/message/%3C374EC19C.39285F01%40aol.com%3E/#%3C374EC19C.39285F01%40aol.com%3E
>
>
> I'm wondering if there's some other primitive that might have been under
> consideration for implementation, or an existing one that might have benefited
> from the addition of a keyword...
>
> Could be so many things.
>
>
http://wiki.povray.org/content/HowTo:Turn_a_continuous_function_into_a_stepped_function
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.general/thread/%3C44b79dae$1@news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=373263&toff=1550
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.unofficial.patches/thread/%3C39A30BD5.5E049847@club-internet.fr%3E/
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.news-submissions/thread/%3C40a14e8c%40news.povray.org%3E/
>
>
> OH - HEY! is "step" a CAD file format?
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.advanced-users/thread/%3Cweb.53bc16a761a21688e9033540@news.povray.org%3E/
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.tools.general/thread/%3Cweb.4b7a2608fde57a8dda6353d60%40news.povray.org%3E/
>
>
looking at u_steps and v_steps, I wonder if someone though of using a
single steps parameter to define both?
Something like "steps Value" as a shortcut to "u_steps Value v_steps Value"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 05.12.2017 um 00:43 schrieb dick balaska:
> On 12/04/2017 05:46 PM, clipka wrote:
>>
>> A curious find.
>>
>> Indeed, the parser does recognize the keyword "steps" as a token
>> (STEPS_TOKEN), but this token is never actually tested for, i.e. it
>> doesn't do anything in any context.
>>
>> The keyword appears to have been introduced in v3.5.0 (it was absent in
>> v3.1g but present in v3.5.0c) without ever having been actually used
>> (verified for v3.5.0c, v3.6.0, v3.6.1 and v3.8.0-alpha).
>>
>
> Who added it?
Officially that would have been Thosten Fröhlich, but judging from the
change description he may just have merged other people's changes:
"Merged in photons, new light groups, more isosurface functions,
"hat" token as exponent sign in express.cpp, lighting changes,
normal bug fix and various other small fixes and extensions"
(Perforce change 237, 2000-06-26)
`u_steps` and `v_steps` already existed at that point.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Officially that would have been Thosten Fröhlich, but judging from the
> change description he may just have merged other people's changes:
>
> "Merged in photons, new light groups, more isosurface functions,
> "hat" token as exponent sign in express.cpp, lighting changes,
> normal bug fix and various other small fixes and extensions"
> (Perforce change 237, 2000-06-26)
>
> `u_steps` and `v_steps` already existed at that point.
Most likely this was either old photons or old isosurface code. I.e. the hat
token functionality was removed, photons and isosurfaces were rewritten. So this
is a leftover. But given this was 17 years ago I don't recall which code might
have used it.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
