 | | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <partsref@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:n6h77ug2idkrqil...4ax.com... (...) Yeah. Hey if we could solve the centering and rotation problem with a table, couldn't we run converters to Anton Raves' library? Would this project be too (...) (23 years ago, 20-Feb-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Yes, there are plans for this. My current issue is with the syntax being used. I'd rather use general 0 IF ... 0 ELSE ... 0 ENDIF meta-statements, rather than the 0 L3P meta-statements. (...) It seems like LGEO is pretty static now. Lutz is (...) (23 years ago, 20-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote... (...) It's OK with me to use e.g. "0 IFDEF L3PPOV" The POV code is (or can be) L3P related. As an example of that see e.g. Chuck Sommerville's minifig head (URL) >Or is the current situation considered adequate (...) Right! We (...) (23 years ago, 21-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) OK. I'll write up a spec/reference page on 0 IFDEF. It will include the following metacommands: 0 IFDEF <code> 0 IFNDEF <code> 0 ELSE 0 ENDIF Should there be a 0 ELSEIFDEF and/or 0 ELSEIFNDEF? (...) Steve (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Which part of it aren't you keen about? Is it all the extra stuff in the dat file? If so, then perhaps this is a good time to dredge up my 0 INCLUDE suggestion yet again. ;) (URL) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) No, I meant the POVRay code referring to L3P-generated objects. By allowing this code in official part files, we'd be endorsing language that hasn't been generally discussed and reviewed. Not that I see any particular problem with the code. (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) So it appears as if we agree that L3P-generated objects don't really belong in official LDRAW part files. Once again this brings us back to the 0 INCLUDE suggestion. Imagine that ldraw.org (or someone else) distributes a separate set of part (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse writes: [snipped things down a bit] (...) Generally, yeah. But mostly to the extent that I haven't thought it through enough. (...) That could work, but IMO only pushes the issue to the side. To some extent, LDraw.org (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Well, if thats how you really feel, then why even bother to "write up a spec/reference page on 0 IFDEF" at all. The instant you put the line: 0 IFDEF <code> in a part file you're blessing a non-ldraw extension. The <code> is by definition a (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
In a nutshell, 'namespaces'. Switching among parts libraries to get different versions (or different data) should be an application capability, not the individual part file. (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) I'm not following. Are you agreeing with the idea of using embedded POV-Ray code, or having separate file libraries? I *think* you agree with the second, am I right? The one thing we gain by having embedded POV-Ray code is the ability to have (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) When I wrote this message, I was trying to figure some rational way to mix LDraw and L3P/POV-Ray code. Something like: 0 IFNDEF L3PPOV (ldraw code) 0 ELSE 0 #if (STUDS) 0 LDRAW 0 1 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 stud2.dat 0 LDRAW END 0 #end 0 (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Right! I have always thought of the "0 IFNDEF L3PPOV" as a way to utilize most of the normal LDraw lines (that L3P can convert to equivalent POV code) and only replace a small tricky curvy section by some POV code that would look better. This (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code? [DAT]
|
|
I see now that your problem is difficult to solve. Sorry I tried to put it into a nutshell, Steve. My preference would be to design an auxiliary file for each case, and markup the LDRAW part in a very general way, so that future programs could (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) No big deal. I just wasn't sure which nut you were shelling. :) (...) Hmm. The problem is that there would be a lot of cases - we've already got a way to handle general stuff (by creating 'primitive' files). And my (general) preference is to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Huh...? This is getting too complicated, lost me! Most of you have seen what I have done with adding POV part descriptions to parts. I believe that I was using them correctly with the "established" methods. To make much change would be too (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) I think where I want to go with it, is to keep things simple and limited. At least for now. Embedded POV-Ray code should not make references to L3P-defined objects or definitions. It should stick strictly with primitive operations. Maybe later (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
