THREE.SetValues

[sunag]

This is a continuation of: #14572 (comment)
Only if there is interest in continuing with parameters as an object we could use THREE.SetValues in others class and examples that use parameters as an object too.

// material
var material = new THREE.MeshLambertMaterial( { map: texture, transparent: true, test:"123" } );

// log warn
"THREE.MeshLambertMaterial: 'test' property does not exist or has become obsolete."

[sunag]

Other use would be:

var props = { color: 0xdddddd, specular: 0x009900, shininess: 30, flatShading: true };

THREE.SetValues( material1, props );
THREE.SetValues( material2, props );
THREE.SetValues( material3, props );
// n

[mrdoob]

Only if there is interest in continuing with parameters as an object ...

I never got to like that API style. It's prone to errors and hard to evolve.

I think I prefer this kind of API:

var material = new THREE.MeshLambertMaterial().setMap( texture ).setTransparent( true );

With such API it's the browser the one notifying that something doesn't exist (undefined method).

[sunag]

I never got to like that API style. It's prone to errors and hard to evolve.

Ok, could we make a function generator like shortcut of NodeMaterial?

(1)

addProperties( THREE.MeshLambertMaterial.prototype, [ "map", "transparent" ] );

or you want to do this manually like?

(2)

setMap: function ( values ) {

	this.map = value;

	return this;

},

getMap: function ( ) {

	return this.map;

},

setTransparent: function ( values ) {

	this.transparent = value;

	return this;

},

getTransparent: function ( ) {

	return this.transparent;

}

An appropriate interface like first approach could help even in serialization.

It would not be a little ambiguous to have both material.map and material.getMap()?