TY for trying , but while 3,4 &5 are completely out as its not a scene but one very complex dense mesh , 1.8 mil tri , - 1 doesn’t help much as cutting mesh 3 times and hiding and its still very laggy.
#2 didn’t work either, as MR is meant for sculpting only. No tutorials I saw said anything about edit mode MR, and I bing’d many times as well as youtube.
I think I must wait for 2.8x and stick with meshmixer for now .
Yea dude, I would have to disagree with you there. While Python is certainly easier to develop in due to it’s distance from machine language, that doesn’t translate into power. It really depends on what you are programming in and for. C++ 11 gives you much more control, especially if you require a lot of high end math in your logic. It is a language suitable for complete application development. Python is suitable and advantageous for writing out scripts and small applications. Also, most major operating systems are still written in good old fashion C a procedural language, which is what C++ is based on. To me, that proves that C and C++ are powerful languages.
Can someone point out a professional game made with BGE? I won’t say it isn’t capable of making decent games, but it clearly lacks experience to be anywhere near Unreal. Blender is great, but it want’s to do everything in one package. That’s good, but… it’s also not.
I think it really depends on what you use for measuring a language’s power. If you use productivity as the ruler, then higher level languages are more powerful, but if you think of power in terms of being less restricted and having more freedom to make a machine do as you please, then low level languages are more powerful. I believe most programmers and computer scientists relate power to the latter though.
For free ya nobody can argue its not worthy and I know you aren’t nor am I, but ya I’ve seen posts on blenderartist forums, and most of the time those discussing making it better or fixing things, often can’t even agree . Some of those who seem to be the most involved, say as I recall, it can’t be fixed; has to be rewritten for GL 3/4 ( whichever it is), as the current ’ viewport’ in blender is based on OLD gGL1 or 2,hence why its SO frustratingly slow on larger meshes. I have no other option but blender ( for vertice/edge edting ONLY ), so atm and hats off to autodesk for this , I use meshmixer which is a incredible app.
I don’t work for them, no, I just appreciate who they are and that they offer this ; or I wouldn’t be where I am ( also with a lot of help from sculptris ) .
There is nothing that C++ can do that Python cannot do, there is a ton of things that Python does that C++ cannot do.
“cannot do” is focusing on the language and its standard library so it equals to “cannot do out of the box”.
Python is basically a scripting language for C. Because it is meant to used this way as its prime role it comes with a lot of facilities to be able to do that. included are static types, manual memory management pointers etc. All these features come inside 2 python libraries that are included with CPython, the ctypes library and the Python C API. If Python could not do the things that C does, it would be unable to call the C libraries that so heavily depends on. Plus almost 50% of CPython is written in C (its not called CPython out of accident) so its pretty big deal to do all the stuff that C does out of the box or else executing python code becomes … impossible.
I think the reason you guys think that C++ or C are more powerful is because of the fact those language have much syntax, but that is just ugly designed syntax. Python has much smaller syntax because it diverts a vast array of its features to its huge standard library. Overall python is not only more powerful but far more complex too.
languages like C and C++ are super weak in pretty much any field. Its this weakness that allows them to be so fast, because they do less during runtime , which is the time that the code executes, it means they execute less machine code and are able to be far faster. Adding features in those language means a direct drop in performance that so much prioritize. Not only they are weak they also advise users not to take advantage of powerful features like C++ templates etc because that will impact the performance both at run time and compile time.
Python is not performance orientated so its has no problem implemented and encouraging the use of any feature, since the priority here is to do more with less effort.
If you limit however python code to the same weaknesses (disable garbage collections, avoid any dynamic type features, access memory directly etc) python becomes far faster and in speed even comparable to C type languages.
What C can do however that python cannot do, is inline assembly code. Of course here we talk out of the box features, because if we go to third party libraries we can find a ton of stuff for python included the ability to inline assembly code. Plus in the modern world almost none codes in Assembly because we have to rely on power to deal with complex code and Assembly has none cause its nothing more than a direct translation from a mnemonic language to machine code.
But then the argument can turn on its head if we bring third party libraries for C/C++ since there are libraries that add Garbage collections, dynamic typing (technically C++ has that via templates , but its still has a lot of remove to improve) etc.
Summary: Without third party libraries, dynamic languages are far more power that static typed languages (especially compiled ones) , with third party libraries its pretty much the same.
Because of those third party libraries , languages will never limit you to what you can and cannot do . You can even extend the syntax , building your own parsers etc. like cython is doing.
PS: there is no argument here, this is not an ideological / philosophical discussion. There is no other way to define power in a language other than its ability to do things without requiring the user having to write the code of these features by himself.