Martin Poirier <the...@yahoo.com> wrote: > It would be simpler to add the missing python wrapper for > modifiers (if any are missing) than hacking the operator system to do > something it's not meant to. > > Modifying existing python scripts for the new api should be easy.
Python modifiers: Yes, definitely a way to do it [1]. Do I understand it correctly that all the current python scripts and blender-internal functions be reused (not duplicated) with some modifications? If not that would be far from optimal since you'd need to recreate every single mesh creation script as a modifier (or something to that extent). Which is ... uhm, not really the goal I had in mind with my proposal :-/ So if this is implemented using modifiers then there ought to be a way to reuse all the existing creation code. I seem to be missing something here. How is that simpler or rather better than my proposal? Don't take this the wrong way, I just want to understand the technical background. I know very little of the current architecture/code in Blender. One way to implement my original proposal is to create a _new object type_ that uses mesh creation operators for its content. (See also the response by GSR [2].) The object properties would be 1:1 representations of the parameters the operators need and the operator is executed each time they change. Is that not a way how operators should work/be used? Maybe I just don't understand them correctly. Cheers, Martin [1] Minor nitpick: The name "Modifier" implies that they modify things, not create from scratch. :-) Even if there is geometry created, there already was some to begin with. So you'd "modify" something in order for something new to be created ... kinda unintuitive. [2] http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2011-October/033790.html _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
