 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thorsten Froehlich
Subject: Re: MegaPov is dead. Long live MegaPov+?
Date: 13 Sep 2000 13:27:00
Message: <39bfb8e4@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39bf9025$1@news.povray.org> , "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlu couk>
wrote:
> Why not POV 3.1g + MP 0.5a - garbage + improvements + bugfixes.
Because we did not just wait two years for MegaPOV to come along so we could
merge it in :-)
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thorsten Froehlich
Subject: Re: MegaPov is dead. Long live MegaPov+?
Date: 13 Sep 2000 13:29:29
Message: <39bfb979@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39BF30B6.158E85D9@aetec.ee> , Vahur Krouverk <vah### [at] aetecee>
wrote:
> What this means? Does it mean, that C++ compiler is now required for
> core POV-Ray? Or system-dependent part of it requires it? Care to
> elaborate?
> Inquiring minds want to know ;-)
Yes, you need a C++ compiler now.
(Not just to you)
Also, keep the "POV-Team Status Report - September 1, 2000" in
povray.announce.frequently-asked-questions in mind :-)
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> No, not completely, but you are getting closer! It is more like:
<snip>
> Get it? ;-)
Uh... I think... I guess... :-)
> There is also the situation where there are two independent features of
the
> same kind that were developed for 3.5 and someone made a patch doing
> something similar.
Oh, this is interesting. Have you run into any cases where what others
implemented independantly was better than what you did?
BTW, this is the kind of discussion on POV 3.5 that I was waiting for. I'm
very happy. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Nathan Kopp
Subject: Re: MegaPov is dead. Long live MegaPov+?
Date: 13 Sep 2000 21:29:17
Message: <39c029ed@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote...
> Nathan Kopp <Nat### [at] koppcom> wrote:
> :> Which details are you thinking of? Do you mean getting a stable syntax,
> :> getting "size" to work correctly, making glows work more like
> :> objects...etc.
>
> : Yes, those would be the details that I'm thinking of. :-)
>
> Since when has megapov cared about stable syntax?-)
Since I started working on POV 3.5 and got the "stable features" mentality
stuck in my head. I let the Smellenbergh brothers know that they can add
glows to MegaPov 0.6 if they want to. :-)
-Nathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
