Nekar Xenos <nek### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I think we need to have a spherical option for heightfields.
And the advantage compared to that include file that does exactly that
is... what exactly?
--
- Warp
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:49:12 +0200, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Nekar Xenos <nek### [at] gmailcom> wrote:>> I think we need to have a spherical option for heightfields.>> And the advantage compared to that include file that does exactly that> is... what exactly?>
oops. I guess I have to go through the docs again...
--
-Nekar Xenos-
From: Jim Holsenback
Subject: Re: spherical Heightfields
Date: 20 Jan 2011 16:40:28
Message: <4d38abcc$1@news.povray.org>
On 01/20/2011 02:30 PM, Nekar Xenos wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:49:12 +0200, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:> >> Nekar Xenos <nek### [at] gmailcom> wrote:>>> I think we need to have a spherical option for heightfields.>>>> And the advantage compared to that include file that does exactly that>> is... what exactly?>>> > oops. I guess I have to go through the docs again...>
this should get you started:
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Documentation:Reference_Section_7.3#The_HF_Macros
On 20/01/2011 16:49, Warp wrote:
> Nekar Xenos<nek### [at] gmailcom> wrote:>> I think we need to have a spherical option for heightfields.>> And the advantage compared to that include file that does exactly that> is... what exactly?
parsing speed, although the way to fix that is indeed not by adding more
hardcoded features, but by making the parser (a lot) faster.
com> wrote: