 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Matthew Webster <mat### [at] nospam virginnet> wrote in message
news:39f89df8@news.povray.org...
> Has anyone ever thought of using a straight C++ interface for POV?
> It seems the language is slowly growing that way anyway but its all
getting
> a bit messy with more and more switches etc.
Why limit it to any particular language? The ImageMagik folks apparently
provide a versatile interface so that scripting can be done in Java, Perl,
Python, etc.
Speaking of Python, I'm only a very short period into it, but it seems VERY
clean and manageable so far.
(Please, no language 'jihad' being provoked here... just an honest first
impression.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OpenMined <**Mail Free America**> wrote:
> Why limit it to any particular language? The ImageMagik folks apparently
> provide a versatile interface so that scripting can be done in Java, Perl,
> Python, etc.
> Speaking of Python, I'm only a very short period into it, but it seems VERY
> clean and manageable so far.
I've often thought of constructing a set of objects for visual scenes in
python, with some kind of reader that produced POV script. Python is a very
clean and simple language, but provides a level of power that POV-script
just doesn't at this time.
Geoff
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I've often thought of constructing a set of objects for visual scenes in
> python, with some kind of reader that produced POV script. Python is a
very
> clean and simple language, but provides a level of power that POV-script
> just doesn't at this time.
If you can make the time, I'm sure more than a few of us would appreciate
the effort. I have found the scenes which a mere page of POV-Script can
produce utterly astonishing. Nevertheless, I suspect that the synergy of
combining the POV engine with Python would be extremely productive.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a8145cd@news.povray.org>, Geoff Wedig
<wed### [at] darwinepbicwruedu> wrote:
> I've often thought of constructing a set of objects for visual scenes
> in python, with some kind of reader that produced POV script.
Look at VPython: http://cil.andrew.cmu.edu/projects/visual/
There is a way to export POV scenes.
> Python is a very clean and simple language, but provides a level of
> power that POV-script just doesn't at this time.
Hmph. I personally don't like what I have seen of it, but I've never had
to do anything in it, and a lot of people do seem to like it.
I mainly don't like the way loops and things don't have a visible
closing, and the fact that it is sensitive to white space. And though it
is supposed to be object oriented, the code I've seen doesn't look very
object oriented to me.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just beginning to investigate Python, but will offer these comments...
> > Python is a very clean and simple language, but provides a level of
> > power that POV-script just doesn't at this time.
>
> Hmph. I personally don't like what I have seen of it, but I've never had
> to do anything in it, and a lot of people do seem to like it.
Sometimes we grow to like what we're "used to." And suspect the rest.
> I mainly don't like the way loops and things don't have a visible
> closing,
How about "# end" or whatever you choose? :-)
> and the fact that it is sensitive to white space.
One of the very things I like. Something to be said for enforcing a modicum
of visual structure, since a paramount issue is code maintenance, not just
generation. In fact, if I adopt Python for major projects involving
multiple programmers, I would welcome a scheme which enforces comments
beginning in, say, column 60, and a minimum number of comments per page.
> And though it
> is supposed to be object oriented, the code I've seen doesn't look very
> object oriented to me.
Isn't it possible to find C++ code which is not object oriented? May be due
in part to the fact that Python is relatively new. Are you aware of any
aspect of object oriented design philiosophy, as commonly defined, which is
missing in Python? (I may not view that as a fatal flaw, but would like to
know.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just as food for mind, have a look at
http://www.curiouslabs.com/products/html/poserProPack.html .
Poser Pro Pack added Python scripting to the Poser core. This does not mean
that the usual way is gone, it means that you have also Python in your
toolkit. If this looks like a proposal for POV4... yes, it is.
Alessandro Coppo
a.c### [at] iolit
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OpenMined <**Mail Free America**> wrote:
>> I've often thought of constructing a set of objects for visual scenes in
>> python, with some kind of reader that produced POV script. Python is a
> very
>> clean and simple language, but provides a level of power that POV-script
>> just doesn't at this time.
> If you can make the time, I'm sure more than a few of us would appreciate
> the effort. I have found the scenes which a mere page of POV-Script can
> produce utterly astonishing. Nevertheless, I suspect that the synergy of
> combining the POV engine with Python would be extremely productive.
I probably can't. I've written mini programs in python that output POV
code, but nothing to that level.
Geoff
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:01:23 +0100, Alessandro Coppo wrote:
>Poser Pro Pack added Python scripting to the Poser core. This does not mean
>that the usual way is gone, it means that you have also Python in your
>toolkit. If this looks like a proposal for POV4... yes, it is.
I've thought about adding a Perl binding, and maybe some OLE automation
stuff in Windows (nothing that would let you render without running the POV
executable, though), but I don't do Python.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions. Mine. Not anyone else's.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff <chr### [at] maccom> wrote:
> In article <3a8145cd@news.povray.org>, Geoff Wedig
> <wed### [at] darwinepbicwruedu> wrote:
>> I've often thought of constructing a set of objects for visual scenes
>> in python, with some kind of reader that produced POV script.
> Look at VPython: http://cil.andrew.cmu.edu/projects/visual/
> There is a way to export POV scenes.
>> Python is a very clean and simple language, but provides a level of
>> power that POV-script just doesn't at this time.
> Hmph. I personally don't like what I have seen of it, but I've never had
> to do anything in it, and a lot of people do seem to like it.
> I mainly don't like the way loops and things don't have a visible
> closing, and the fact that it is sensitive to white space. And though it
> is supposed to be object oriented, the code I've seen doesn't look very
> object oriented to me.
The white space thing I tend to agree with. It does take getting used to.
On the other hand, it's actually pretty nice. I've worked with programmers
who use "arbitrary" rules -- which is to say rules that change from one line
to the next -- to write their code. Having a built in requirement to lay
your code out neatly isn't a bad thing at all.
As for OO, python was originally a scripting tool, like Perl (it actually
pre-dates perl, but only has recently gotten much recognition) Most of the
code out there is very script like for that reason. However, it does have a
fairly powerful OO component, as tools like wxPython show. It's a very
flexible language in that sense.
Geoff
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Feb 2001 08:35:10 -0500, Geoff Wedig wrote:
>The white space thing I tend to agree with. It does take getting used to.
>On the other hand, it's actually pretty nice. I've worked with programmers
>who use "arbitrary" rules -- which is to say rules that change from one line
>to the next -- to write their code. Having a built in requirement to lay
>your code out neatly isn't a bad thing at all.
But tools like "indent" can fix stupid programmer tricks in C. In Python,
the same stupid programmer tricks (or corruption due to some idiot loading
the script into a word processor, or whatever) kill the program in weird
and wonderful ways.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions. Mine. Not anyone else's.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
