POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.pov4.discussion.general : Random POV-Ray 4 SDL proposal, #2 : Re: Random POV-Ray 4 SDL proposal, #2 Server Time
15 Jun 2024 11:12:49 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Random POV-Ray 4 SDL proposal, #2  
From: scott
Date: 15 Dec 2015 10:56:29
Message: <5670382d$1@news.povray.org>
>> Much easier for who? The users or the developers? Does the benefit for
>> the users outweigh the inconveniences of having to look-up/remember and
>> type out (or copy and paste) the parameter names every single time?
> Let's put it this way: What good is a user-friendly syntax if no user ever gets
> to use it, because its implementation is never finished?
> Remember, your question was whether there is any benefit to forcing one way or
> another; here is one. Development manpower is a limited resource, and while I do
> want to take some time to design a reasonably usable language, I think the whole
> matter of nameless properties is too controversial to make it onto the list of
> mandatory features of the language.

OK, well I guess I should have been clearer that I was talking about 
user benefits. But yours is a valid point, there isn't unlimited 
developer resource.

> Also, the simpler the language, the easier and faster the scene code may be
> analyzed as the user is typing; I'd expect the language to be simple enough so
> that the editor may assist the user on-the-fly in remembering the property names
> by providing auto-completion.

VS C# style auto-completion (and all the other pop-up helper things in 
the editor) would be amazing for POV. I only realise how much all those 
things help speed up development when I have to use another editor (even 
the VS C++ editor is poor in comparison). Obviously if we can assume 
there will be an editor with a half-decent auto-complete, the arguments 
are different somewhat.

Is developing an editor within the scope of POV4 too then?

Post a reply to this message

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