|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> fast ? <https://www.southampton.ac.uk/~sjc/raspberrypi/pi_pictures.htm>
> may also be a fun way to keep the older ones running.
You love this small box or you ignore it.
"jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> would it not be a good idea to update your 'ma_helpers.inc' to version 3.8 ?
> you'd get to use the new 'optional' keyword for macro arguments
it's not just about optional parameters, but also about the lack of
type-identification.
And as long as version 3.8 is not part of the official Debian repository, I will
use and write for version 3.7.
Installing the package manually requires more Linux knowledge, I also avoid that
if possible.
Debian-Version in the current Release: 3.7.0.10
https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/povray
In the next Release: 3.7.0.10
https://packages.debian.org/trixie/povray
I hope my scripts are useful nevertheless.
Martin
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
"Maetes" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > may also be a fun way to keep the older ones running.
> You love this small box or you ignore it.
:-) the (late) Mrs Thatcher liked to say "there is no alternative".
> > you'd get to use the new 'optional' keyword for macro arguments
> it's not just about optional parameters, but also about the lack of
> type-identification.
> And as long as version 3.8 is not part of the official Debian repository, I will
> use and write for version 3.7.
> Installing the package manually requires more Linux knowledge, I also avoid that
> if possible.
ah, shame. if "Linux knowledge" weren't an issue (you'd need to compile/install
from source), the 'yuqk' branch might "tick your boxes"; there's (SDL) support
for querying type of variable, for instance. the latest is here:
<https://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.programming/thread/%3C675ff7f7%40news.povray.org%3E/>
(and we're all _waiting_ for .. the gods to pull out their thumbs and make 3.8
official)
> I hope my scripts are useful nevertheless.
still "investigating" ;-)
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
> ah, shame. if "Linux knowledge" weren't an issue (you'd need to compile/install
> from source), the 'yuqk' branch might "tick your boxes"; there's (SDL) support
> for querying type of variable, for instance.
I don't waste time to check other or Beta-Versions of Povray.
I waste time to write complex macros from scratch :)
(soooo many hours, shame on ME)
> (and we're all _waiting_ for .. the gods to pull out their thumbs and make 3.8
> official)
Unfortunately, I can't find any item of my personal wish list (except for
optional parameters) in the revision list of version 3.8.
These are:
- spherical heightfields
- Type-Identification
- new functions to handle strings/arrays
- Object-Oriented Programming (Classes)
https://wiki.povray.org/content/Documentation:Tutorial_Section_1#Version_3.8
Whether 3.7 or 3.8 makes little difference to me.
So I have to wait for Povray 4.0 (year 2030?) and write macros, macros, macros
......
Or I push my C++ skills and find out if I can work on the development of
Povray-Sourcode. I've already started but failed (to view/understand/compile the
source).
Next life, maybe.
Or I will try the "B-Thing".
Ma
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Maetes" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Unfortunately, I can't find any item of my personal wish list (except for
> optional parameters) in the revision list of version 3.8.
> These are:
> - spherical heightfields
> - Type-Identification
> - new functions to handle strings/arrays
> - Object-Oriented Programming (Classes)
Spherical heightfields:
"shapes.inc includes shapes_old.inc and contains many macros for working with
objects, and for creating special objects, such as bevelled text, spherical
height fields, and rounded shapes."
https://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Shapes.inc
So it ought to be in the drop-down insert menu.
https://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C5f16dc29%40news.povray.org%3E/
https://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C38a2dc5b%40news.povray.org%3E/
> Whether 3.7 or 3.8 makes little difference to me.
3.8 does have some little fixes and things, so I've been running that since it
got released as the beta.
> So I have to wait for Povray 4.0 (year 2030?) and write macros, macros, macros
> ......
Welcome to the club. It's not big, and you're in it. ;)
> Or I push my C++ skills and find out if I can work on the development of
> Povray-Sourcode. I've already started but failed (to view/understand/compile the
> source).
jr and I are looking into that. But at the moment we're both sort of tied up
with too much non-POV-Ray real life drudgery. :(
> Or I will try the "B-Thing".
:O Hush.
- BW
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
to add to Bald Eagle's reply.
> - new functions to handle strings/arrays
can you give some examples of what you (most) miss, please ?
> - Object-Oriented Programming (Classes)
Bruno Cabasson had "a go":
<https://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.scene-files/thread/%3Cweb.621f42cb592fe9587283012224d82e4%40news.povray.org%3E
/>
but SDL would need to be "divorced" from its current parser before classes
("proper", as I imagine you mean), etc could be part of the language.
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Maetes" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> Or I will try the "B-Thing".
>
> Ma
Please do ! Our POV-Ray addon needs feedback :
https://extensions.blender.org/add-ons/povable/
You may also be interested in the work of when refactorings tend to occur)
He tried to demonstrate how to implement some object oriented features to POV:
https://news.povray.org/povray.programming/thread/%3Cweb.621b65ab50be6c547283012224d82e4%40news.povray.org%3E/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> Spherical heightfields:
>
> "shapes.inc includes shapes_old.inc and contains many macros for working with
> objects, and for creating special objects, such as bevelled text, spherical
> height fields, and rounded shapes."
> https://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Shapes.inc
> So it ought to be in the drop-down insert menu.
>
https://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C5f16dc29%40news.povray.org%3E/
>
https://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C38a2dc5b%40news.povray.org%3E/
Hmmm ... I will check it, first try looks promising.
But there are some strage "features" in the picture.
Later, in a separate thread.
> Welcome to the club. It's not big, and you're in it. ;)
>
> > Or I push my C++ skills and find out if I can work on the development of
> > Povray-Sourcode.
>
> jr and I are looking into that. But at the moment we're both sort of tied up
> with too much non-POV-Ray real life drudgery. :(
Yes yes, I know.
Could do it around the clock, but have other things to do, unfortunately.
> > Or I will try the "B-Thing".
> :O Hush.
:)
I deliberately didn't dare to write the bad word.
ma
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> hi,
> > - new functions to handle strings/arrays
>
> can you give some examples of what you (most) miss, please ?
Most of the functions handwritten in my helper package. Searching in strings,
filtering, sorting arrays, etc.
PHP has dozens of functions for this. I wrote most of the ones I needed, but it
was a hell of work. And I'm still amazed that Povray interprets them so quickly,
thought that would slow everything down.
What annoyed me a lot:
You have no chance of figuring out what type a variable is. You have to know
what it is and cant convert them automatically.
On the other hand, povray is not a real programming language but focuses on the
render output.
I am happy about what it can do and that I was able to extend it for myself.
So I don't want to complain.
I have a wish list, but I don't expect anyone to implement it in their free
time. And my programming skills do not allow me to get involved in the project
at the moment. So I have to live with what I have, and that's a lot of fun.
Ma
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mr" <m******r******at_hotmail_dot_fr> wrote:
> "Maetes" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> >
> > Or I will try the "B-Thing".
>
> Please do ! Our POV-Ray addon needs feedback :
> https://extensions.blender.org/add-ons/povable/
You won't believe it, but coincidentally I tested this just before Christmas!
(or a similar Extension)
My goal was to get some models of NASA spacecraft from Blender to Povray -
without any B-Thing knowledge!
It worked, more or less, but looks like all Textures were gone.
I canceld further tests, because B was too complicated for me, after > 4 hours I
had enough.
Maybe I will give it another try. Somewhen.
IS THERE A SEPARATE THREAD FOR THIS EXTENSION?
Martin
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
"Maetes" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > can you give some examples of what you (most) miss, please ?
> Most of the functions handwritten in my helper package. ...
ok.
> What annoyed me a lot:
> You have no chance of figuring out what type a variable is. You have to know
> what it is and cant convert them automatically.
> On the other hand, povray is not a real programming language but focuses on the
> render output.
so.. :-) by now (as of 3.7 I think, perhaps earlier) the Scene Description
Language (SDL) is "Turing complete". but it evolved to that stage, and both
developers and users obsess about "backward compatibility", therefore SDL, the
current parser, is most unlikely to evolve further to offer us worthwhile
"introspection" tools (like WFP started introducing in his branch).
> I am happy about what it can do and that I was able to extend it for myself.
> So I don't want to complain.
is all we do ;-) (also gets easier with age. more time to practice :-))
> I have a wish list, but I don't expect anyone to implement it in their free
> time. And my programming skills do not allow me to get involved in the project
> at the moment. So I have to live with what I have, and that's a lot of fun.
+1.
>> jr and I are looking into that. But at the moment we're both sort of tied up
>> with too much non-POV-Ray real life drudgery. :(
> Yes yes, I know.
> Could do it around the clock, but have other things to do, unfortunately.
you live in the same world we do, so you do know that it is all about ..
pedalling faster, to keep standing still. </shrug> but I think the majority of
"us" would spend more time "povving", if RL allowed.
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |