[Bf-python] NMesh vs Mesh

[Willian Padovani Germano]

On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 05:02, Manuel wrote:
(...)
> Why Mesh is necessary?

Right now, only for full compatibility with the current 2.25 API.  As I
said, there is no Mesh C implementation, the end of NaN came before that
was written.

> If you are done material and image in the NMesh module (Wow, great!), it's
> very
> complete, IMHO.

After the Scene module is done, we'll be able to test more complicate
scripts.  Then we can check those bugs in .update() and hopefully fix
them.  Then NMesh will be fine : ).

> Consider that NMESH module is very "famous" and documentated:
(...)

Hey, thanks for the info.  Yes, personally I prefer NMesh, too.  Mesh
gave me a lot of trouble when I had to update my scripts.

> The material and image parts of NMesh will be available in Blender2.28?
Yes, they are already there, only untested.

> And, again, why Mesh is necessary? Where are the problems in NMesh?
> It's dirty-hasty code?

It's not as readable as the new parts in exppython, for sure, but mesh
handling is also more complicate, so...  But it is good code (specially
if those bugs you reported are fixed, of course).

*Users can safely use NMesh*, the current plan is to keep and fix it. 
If Mesh gets "implemented", it will only be a layer on top of NMesh.c
for compatibility with 2.25.

There may be a totally new Mesh module, but not for 2.28 and probably
not for the current mesh implementation in Blender, but for a new one
that can eventually emerge.

--
Willian, wgermano at ig.com.br