Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> SharkD <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > clipka wrote:
> > > As a matter of fact, if Lua was a good deal closer to C, I might already be
> > > jumping up shouting "that's our language!"
>
> > Well, there's good news:
....

>   I don't think you understood him. I believe he meant "if Lua was a good
> deal closer to C *in syntax*".

Exactly.

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> SharkD <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> clipka wrote:
>>> I think there's no need to have dedicated support for parsing other file formats
>>> in the SDL language syntax itself: A set of library functions should do, I
>>> guess. Which would also mean that there wouldn't be need to implement it right
>>> from the start.
>> No, you got it backwards. The aim is to make POV SDL easy to parse by
>> other programs. I've already written a Lua parser (specifically, a
>> pretty-printer for program source code) that anyone is welcome to adapt
>> if things end up going that way.
> 
> ?? Your statement doesn't parse to me in this context.
> 
> The previous post I was referring to proposed that *POV* should be able to parse
> *other* formats.
> 
> This was plain and clear: .obj and .df3 were explicitly mentioned - which are
> file formats, not programs.

Woops! My mistake.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message