Did anybody had the idea to change behaviour of Povray in that way that it
accepts programm calls like
povray +pv +w 640 +h 480 +i inputfile.pov +o outputfile.png
instead of:
povray +p +v +w640 +h480 +iinputfile.pov +ooutputfile.png
?
Is there a way to force that behaviour? Will it be possible in next
releases?
Is there an idea behind how it accepts paramters for now?

I often use command expandation by tabs. If some would take away my
expandation I would throw away my PC. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

marabou scripsit::
> Did anybody had the idea to change behaviour of Povray in that way that it
> accepts programm calls like
> povray +pv +w 640 +h 480 +i inputfile.pov +o outputfile.png
> instead of:
> povray +p +v +w640 +h480 +iinputfile.pov +ooutputfile.png
> ?
> Is there a way to force that behaviour? Will it be possible in next
> releases?
> Is there an idea behind how it accepts paramters for now?
> 
> I often use command expandation by tabs. If some would take away my
> expandation I would throw away my PC. ;-)
> 

use:
povray inputfile.ini

instead of your complex line!
Best of both world: command-line expandable and rememberable setting!


-- 
Eifersucht ist die Leidenschaft, die mit Eifer sucht, was Leiden
schafft.

Eco: -8.75 Soc: -6.72
http://www.politicalcompass.org/

Post a reply to this message

marabou <not### [at] availableyet> wrote:
> I often use command expandation by tabs.

gcc -L~/mylibs -I~/myincs -lfoo foo.c -o foo

does this ring a bell?  behaviour not exclusive to povray, though i agree
with you that it would be nice... :)

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:

> marabou <not### [at] availableyet> wrote:
>> I often use command expandation by tabs.
> 
> gcc -L~/mylibs -I~/myincs -lfoo foo.c -o foo
> 
> does this ring a bell?  behaviour not exclusive to povray, though i agree
> with you that it would be nice... :)

I use makefiles. Therefore no need to use that line above. ;-)
But I agree.

Maybe it is possible to patch Povray to this behaviour. In Perl I would use
getopts() which give me such. 
Povray has a license which does not allow to distribute a not official
patched version. So doing it on my own does not look realistic.

Post a reply to this message

Le Forgeron wrote:

[..]
> 
> use:
> povray inputfile.ini
> 
> instead of your complex line!
> Best of both world: command-line expandable and rememberable setting!
> 
> 
I often change filenames and image sizes. Sometimes I create makefiles, but
it makes too much work. Ini-files either.

Preventing one suggestion: No, I do not want a GUI.

Post a reply to this message

marabou <not### [at] availableyet> wrote:
> povray +pv +w 640 +h 480 +i inputfile.pov +o outputfile.png

> I often use command expandation by tabs. If some would take away my
> expandation I would throw away my PC. ;-)

  I don't understand what do you need command "expandation" there,
except for the input file name, which you can give to povray without
the +i anyways.

  Put the default command-line parameters, those which you always use,
in ~/.povray/3.6/povray.ini and the rest is rather easy to write in
the command line, like this:

povray inp<tab> -w640 -h480 +a

  Since you are using filename expansion, you probably are using command
history too, so to repeat that command just press the up arrow until
it appears.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

marabou wrote:
> Povray has a license which does not allow to distribute a not official
> patched version. So doing it on my own does not look realistic.

This is probably not correct, distribution of patched versions is permitted
in most circumstances provided the requirements are followed. What part of
the license do you have an issue with?

-- Chris Cason
   POV-Team

Post a reply to this message

Chris Cason wrote:

> marabou wrote:
>> Povray has a license which does not allow to distribute a not official
>> patched version. So doing it on my own does not look realistic.
> 
> This is probably not correct, distribution of patched versions is
> permitted in most circumstances provided the requirements are followed.
> What part of the license do you have an issue with?
> 
> -- Chris Cason
>    POV-Team

I would not call it an issue. 
After reading source-license.txt I have understood that it is permitted to
alter source code in most circumstances. My thoughts are that:
Every source file has a copyright notice and a reference to povlegal(.doc).
Every copyright is related to POV team or Persistence of Vision Raytracer
Pty. Ltd. That is right. If code is altered, copyright holders a not more
completely correct, because someone has done modifications. It would look
as modified code would come from team members or, if source is marked
unofficial, you can not distinguish which codeline is official and which is
not.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

[..]
>   Put the default command-line parameters, those which you always use,
> in ~/.povray/3.6/povray.ini and the rest is rather easy to write in
> the command line, like this:
> 
> povray inp<tab> -w640 -h480 +a
> 
[..]

Last time I read
<html-documentation-path>/povray-3.6/html/s_95.html#s03_01_02_04
was in version 3.5. So I did not know that this is possible.
Interestingly documentation says that input file should be last parameter.
But it renders with that commandline you said.
It was my fault and my thoughts are obsolete.
Thank you very much.

Post a reply to this message

marabou wrote:
> After reading source-license.txt I have understood that it is permitted to
> alter source code in most circumstances. My thoughts are that:
> Every source file has a copyright notice and a reference to povlegal(.doc).
> Every copyright is related to POV team or Persistence of Vision Raytracer
> Pty. Ltd. That is right. If code is altered, copyright holders a not more
> completely correct, because someone has done modifications. It would look
> as modified code would come from team members or, if source is marked
> unofficial, you can not distinguish which codeline is official and which is
> not.

You have a point here; we do not have an official policy on how others should
mark individual files that they have modified. Probably we should put some
thought into this prior to releasing the version 3.7 source code.

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message