On 9/19/21 4:22 AM, jr wrote:
> thinking aloud about the simulation, and not having used 'f_wood()' yet, as user
> I think I'd like one simple (wrapper) function/macro where, ideally, I'd only
> provide an "age" (ie #rings) and some average "annual" growth value to obtain a
> pattern, and maybe a rand seed. (I guess all eight parameters will be needed
> when "tuning" some aspect(s) of the render)
FYI - I've not published a povr version with f_wood().
Yes, a simpler interface would likely be the more common use case in
practice. With many of new inbuilt functions, I'm trying out and tuning
ideas. I want knobs and switches and expect further change
In fact With f_wood been thinking about additional return value pairs...
Internally, we are always tracking a previous positional sum for ring
count and the the next sum - so we can do a linear interpolation at the
value between the two value 'positions.'
My thinking is we can probably create some interesting isosurface
ladder/net/web like structures by using the leg positions of the ladder
as seeds and, local to the value, four corner positions. Maybe connect
up TOK's point to point linear sweeps on the fly.
> unrelated, but I've only found out about two_exciting_ Tcl extensions; thinking
> that when 'povr'/POV-Ray compiles, the "library" of backend stuff which is
> linked late in the process, I'm fairly certain, could be (mis-)used;-) with
> either of these:
Thanks for the pointers. The first rings no bells, but I see from my
notes I've stumbled across the second site at some point.
I played some - looks like now, way back in 2019 :-| - with:
which is based on a much earlier tcl function wrapper package that's
15-20 years older IIRC. There is too, of course, swig.
With tcl wrappers of C++, I always seem to get as far as a few examples,
but never much more before I drop the effort for other - less painful -
On the practical side, I find I often drop back to to extracting enough
of the POV-Ray header structure to compile tiny c++ programs when first
trying bits of code. The compile / link loop is then really quick even
if I happen to be playing also with the headers. I've got an older two
core i3. Even with 'make -j4', changed header compiles take a while.
Post a reply to this message