Just found this funny little trace of the “human factor”, so to speak, in Max script.
Create a new Linear or Automatic exposure control and test it’s .brightness property. Now test it’s .brightess (missing the “n”) property as well. They’re one and the same! My guess is the misspelled version was introduced first, and not found until later, but was kept for backwards compatibility.
Wow… and to think that programmers are humans just like me (only smarter )
a=Automatic_Exposure_Control()
a.brightness
a.brightess
The official line would be they were anticipating the misspell and coded it in to avoid errors heh heh.
Well coding for dislectic people would be an *** like that 😮
John, could you log a bug for this?
Just try to point out that it belongs to the maxscript feature.
A defect is SOOO much more likely to get fixed if it is logged. Once it hits my desk, it should be easier to track down and fix.
Chris J.
Sure thing. The only reason why I didn’t previously was because the proper spelling does indeed work, so it didn’t seem worth bothering you guys with it. I just thought it was cute.