Yeah, I think we'd want to target C99, because as far as I know, most things with a C ffi target C99.
I'll try to gather a list of C projects to see how they name things. Also, I'll probably share some of how Rust names functions and methods to hopefully gather some more options. On Mon., Oct. 19, 2020, 3:55 p.m. Anders Langlands, < [email protected]> wrote: > I’d personally prefer to see if we could shorten the names a little so > “oiio_ii_open” instead of “OIIO_ImageInput_open” if we could make sure that > there wouldn’t be any abbreviation conflicts. The long form does have the > advantage that it’s unambiguous though. > > Regarding standards, Visual Studio has only just added support for C11 and > C17 in preview and I don’t think we’d need anything beyond C99 for an API > wrapper anyway? > > > > On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 10:18, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I've been in C++ land for so long that I'm afraid I don't know the idioms >> that modern C culture likes these days. Is what you describe >> OIIO_ImageInput_open or OIIO_ImageBufAlgo_add... does that look like the >> way a 2020 C programmer would try to "namespace" things in C that has no >> namespaces? Or would a C programmer scoff at how wordy it is? >> >> As far as how to name overloads... I think it might be instructive to >> look at a few individual cases first and what feels right, then see if they >> generalize into an overall rule. I'm hesitant to propose a rule first >> without examples to know if we're going to hate it in practice. >> >> Which C standard would you want to target? >> >> -- lg >> >> >> On Oct 19, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Sounds good to me. Also, if you want to automate the c bindings to some >> degree, then you can look at https://github.com/EmbarkStudios/physx-rs >> for inspiration. There's a talk in the readme with their c bindings >> builder. Failing that, I'm fine with going through the legwork of making >> the c interface. >> >> If I may make a suggestion for the naming, I'd suggest more or less >> following what OIIO does in C++. So, for example, >> OIIO::ImageInput.open(...) would be OIIO_ImageInput_open(...) and >> classes/structs would be OIIOImageInput. >> >> The only question I have at the moment is how do we want to handle naming >> functions with overrides? >> >> On Mon., Oct. 19, 2020, 1:00 p.m. Anders Langlands, < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Branching this thread to talk specifics... >>> >>> So to summarize the different approaches we've each taken, in my repo ( >>> https://github.com/anderslanglands/oiio-rs/tree/master/coiio) I have a >>> small shim library that creates a C interface to OIIO by wrapping with >>> functions like: >>> >>> ImageBuf ImageBuf_create(const char* filename) { >>> return new OIIO::ImageBuf(OIIO::string_view(filename)); >>> } >>> >>> When building the rust crate, this is compiled into a static library by >>> Cargo using CMake, with the environment variable OIIO_ROOT specifying the >>> path to the OIIO installation. Currently the build script errors out if >>> OIIO_ROOT is not specified, but it would be trivial to have it default to >>> /usr/local etc. I also at one point had it downloading OIIO and building it >>> directly, but cmake-rs had some issues with always rebuilding OIIO on any >>> change to the crate, which made development interminable, so I stripped >>> that out. That was nearly two years ago so may have been fixed. A good >>> alternative would be to provide a separate (bash or python) build script >>> that would download deps and run the build manually as a pre-process. >>> >>> From what I can tell from Scott's repo, cxx is doing essentially the >>> same thing, but cxx handles building the shim library internally, so >>> there's no need for invoking CMake from build.rs. Presumably you'd >>> still need to specify the path to (and potentially build) OIIO and its deps >>> using this method. If you compare the code in Scott's repo to mine, you can >>> see they're very similar indeed. >>> >>> The issue I see here is that I don't think cxx actually saves you >>> anything. In fact there's *more* code in the cxx case because you're >>> specifying both the implementation (ffi.cpp) and the interface (ffi.h), >>> whereas I only have to specify the implementation (coiio.cpp) and the >>> interface is declared solely in ffi.rs. >>> >>> Building and linking the static library is the easiest part of the >>> process, and is also the part that would be more generally useful outside >>> of just Rust - you could use that C interface to trivially bind any >>> language you want, so I think we want to preserve that. >>> >>> That leaves the question of how do we generate the C interface in the >>> first place. I've been doing it manually, which is a tedious process, but >>> works. Since it's just calling the C++ directly I think it's also >>> reasonably sturdy against changes to the underlying OIIO API, since the >>> compiler should catch most misuses, although I'm sure there are plenty of >>> opportunities for subtle bugs still. Not to mention bikeshedding about >>> naming conventions and code styles :) >>> >>> My idea for how to make the binding generation more automatic was to try >>> and leverage libclang to generate the C wrappers semi-automatically. This >>> would still require a fair amount of code: first writing the binding >>> generator, then writing the rules for how to wrap the C++ API, but should >>> allow generating the C API automatically, rather than maintaining it >>> manually for every release. The downside is obviously this tool doesn't >>> exist yet, and it would add a (optional) dependency on clang to the project. >>> >>> I think the best course of action here would be to write a C wrapper in >>> OIIO itself that could be maintained along with the rest of the project. >>> This would build a little C99 library that could be installed alongside the >>> C++ library. This would unfortunately mean manually writing a header to go >>> with it, although that part could probably be automated with a little >>> scripting. >>> >>> Then oiio-rs should be a completely separate Rust crate that just uses >>> bindgen to generate the unsafe API from the C library automatically, and >>> provides a safe API on top of that. (Larry - Rust/Cargo kinda assumes that >>> Cargo is the thing doing all the building and dependency management, so >>> trying to provide a Rust artefact from the OIIO build process would be >>> painful if it's possible at all). >>> >>> Let me know what you think. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Anders >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 02:53, Alvaro Castaneda <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Larry and Anders >>>> I'm helping Scott with the Rust Wrapper. >>>> using CXX is been good, it is a very manual process and makes it only >>>> usable in Rust, Larry you mentioned a minimal C API, that would make it >>>> much simpler to wrap to Rust, that would also mean in can be wrapped to >>>> many other languages, >>>> So far we didn't want to go the C route, but that might not be a bad >>>> idea since it would open the library a lot more and it might make it >>>> simpler to automate, at least the bulk of it, for Rust. >>>> >>>> We need to discuss the approach. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 8:40 PM Anders Langlands < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Scott, yes please do add me to the repo I’d love to take a look and >>>>> pitch in as time allows. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 13:43, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hey Anders, >>>>>> >>>>>> Cxx has so far been pretty okay. It's pretty manual (hopefully >>>>>> autocxx makes it better, but as far as I know, it's still nowhere ready >>>>>> for >>>>>> using it on OpenImageIO). Right now the process looks something like >>>>>> this: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Create a header/cpp file that contains all of your class methods >>>>>> as functions. >>>>>> 2. Create an unsafe Rust interferface that's a 1 to 1 copy of the C++ >>>>>> side. >>>>>> 3. Create a safe Rust interface. >>>>>> >>>>>> For me, the really nice thing is I don't need to worry about the C++ >>>>>> -> C -> Rust steps. It drops the C step, but I still need to write that >>>>>> C++ >>>>>> "ugly" interface. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, if you want to join in on the fun, our repo is currently >>>>>> private while we get things to a working state. But, I can add you to the >>>>>> repo. Otherwise, I'm up for a discussion on how to take both designs and >>>>>> come up with the best one. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 4:51 PM Anders Langlands < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Wrapping C in Rust is a two-stage process: first writing an "unsafe" >>>>>>> FFI binding to the C API, which is usually almost completely automated >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> a crate called bindgen, then writing a "safe" crate that provides a >>>>>>> Rust-y >>>>>>> API using the unsafe FFI bindings. Wrapping C++ means writing a C API >>>>>>> first, then binding that to Rust, which is what my crate does. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've been meaning to return to this (and OSL, OpenSubdiv and others) >>>>>>> at some point and try to make a project-specific C-binding generator >>>>>>> using >>>>>>> libclang, as manually maintaining the C stubs is laborious and >>>>>>> error-prone. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Scott, I'd be curious to know how you're getting on with cxx, I've >>>>>>> been meaning to look into that. I'd be happy to collaborate on >>>>>>> something we >>>>>>> could integrate into the main project as Larry suggests. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 12:30, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Feel free to have the discussion on-list, I'm sure it would be of >>>>>>>> interest to many. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If there was consensus on what the Rust APIs should look like, I >>>>>>>> would welcome adding a set of Rust bindings to the main OIIO >>>>>>>> distribution. >>>>>>>> Assuming that makes sense, I was thinking it would be much like we now >>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>> with the Python bindings. The advantage to making Rust bindings part >>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>> main build would be that it could be built and tested as part of our >>>>>>>> CI, >>>>>>>> versioned along with the rest of OIIO, and essentially never allowed to >>>>>>>> break. Also, just like we would never accept a PR that added C++ >>>>>>>> functionality without making sure the Python bindings kept up, we could >>>>>>>> ensure that nothing is left out of the Rust bindings. While I can >>>>>>>> appreciate the cleanliness and independence of it being a separate >>>>>>>> project, >>>>>>>> I can't help but think that it will be a neverending nightmare to try >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> keep the bindings in sync with the main project. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't know how automated it is to make Rust bindings for C (I >>>>>>>> know it's a PITA for C++), but if making Rust bindings is substantially >>>>>>>> easier if you had minimal plain C wrappers for the major C++ classes, >>>>>>>> I'm >>>>>>>> sure there would be a lot of happy consumers of that even outside the >>>>>>>> Rust >>>>>>>> interest group. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I haven't had time to try Rust myself for any programming project, >>>>>>>> though I've followed it from afar and like the idea of helping that >>>>>>>> community. TBH, the main thing that keeps me from spending any time on >>>>>>>> Rust >>>>>>>> is just that I can't contemplate the hassle of trying to program >>>>>>>> without my >>>>>>>> favourite libraries, and having OIIO (and its many utilities that I >>>>>>>> reuse >>>>>>>> in basically everything I write) available in Rust will substantially >>>>>>>> lower >>>>>>>> the bar for me to dabble in it more. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- lg >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Oct 18, 2020, at 4:12 PM, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hey Anders, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We were inspired by what you did, and also decided to see if we can >>>>>>>> take this in a slightly different direction/ use cxx. If you're >>>>>>>> interested >>>>>>>> in discussing the wrapper more we can take it off the list. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 3:35 PM Anders Langlands < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I also have a rust binding here if you're interested: >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/anderslanglands/oiio-rs >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 at 04:43, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Awesome, thank you very much! I'll try this out and see how badly >>>>>>>>>> I break things. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat., Oct. 17, 2020, 1:02 a.m. Larry Gritz, <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If you know the true legal extent of the memory allocation in >>>>>>>>>>> which that data pointer is located (in this case, the beginning and >>>>>>>>>>> ending >>>>>>>>>>> of the vector, if you are passing a pointer to one of the elements >>>>>>>>>>> of that >>>>>>>>>>> vector), then I think you could certainly consider it an error if >>>>>>>>>>> any of >>>>>>>>>>> these addresses lay outside that buffer: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> data + xstride*width - 1 >>>>>>>>>>> data + ystride*height - 1 >>>>>>>>>>> data + ystride*(height - 1) + xstride*width - 1 >>>>>>>>>>> data + zstride*depth >>>>>>>>>>> data + zstride*(depth - 1) + ystride*height - 1 >>>>>>>>>>> data + zstride*(depth - 1) + ystride*(height - 1) + >>>>>>>>>>> xstride*width - 1 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There may be a more succinct way to put that, but I think it >>>>>>>>>>> covers all the cases of + and - strides. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 17, 2020, at 12:42 AM, Scott Wilson < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! I guess to come from this at a different angle, let's >>>>>>>>>>> say I'm doing something like this: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> std::vector<uint8_t> pixels(10*10*3*1); >>>>>>>>>>> ImageInput.read_image(TypeDesc::UINT8, @pixels[0]) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Would there be a case where I could pick a stride value that >>>>>>>>>>> would fall outside the pixels vector? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> PS: Thanks! I'm working on this with a friend, and hope to have >>>>>>>>>>> something released in the near future. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri., Oct. 16, 2020, 11:47 p.m. Larry Gritz, < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Oops, my math was wrong (in an unimportant detail): If you are >>>>>>>>>>>> making a mosaic of 16x5 of these 10x10 images, it is 80 small >>>>>>>>>>>> images you >>>>>>>>>>>> are assembling in total, not 40. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2020, at 11:43 PM, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The strides don't describe the size of the image, they are the >>>>>>>>>>>> spacing in memory of where you want the values to be placed upon >>>>>>>>>>>> being read >>>>>>>>>>>> (or taken from in order to write). There is no invalid set of >>>>>>>>>>>> strides, >>>>>>>>>>>> because the caller might want them to end up anywhere in memory. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Or am I misunderstanding? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> For a fully "contiguous" memory buffer where you intend for >>>>>>>>>>>> every plane, scanline, pixel, and channel immediately follows the >>>>>>>>>>>> previous >>>>>>>>>>>> one, then in our example the strides would be xstride=3, >>>>>>>>>>>> ystride=30, >>>>>>>>>>>> zstride=300. (Though for a 2D image, the zstride is not used.) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Here's an example of where you might have a stride range that >>>>>>>>>>>> is wildly outside this: Let's say that you have 40 of these 10 x >>>>>>>>>>>> 10 x 3 x >>>>>>>>>>>> uint8 image files and you are trying to read them in and assemble >>>>>>>>>>>> them into >>>>>>>>>>>> a single RGBA mosaic image of 16x5 x 4 x uint8 (the additional >>>>>>>>>>>> channel is >>>>>>>>>>>> alpha, which you will separately fill in as 1.0 [or 255 uint8] >>>>>>>>>>>> because it's >>>>>>>>>>>> not in your RGB files). Here's a cartoon to illustrate this: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +-----------------------------------------+ >>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | |X| | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>> +-----------------------------------------+ >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Each of my little grid cells is a 10x10 image. But that 10x10 >>>>>>>>>>>> image denoted by the "X" needs to be placed in memory in the right >>>>>>>>>>>> portion >>>>>>>>>>>> of the 16x10 x 5x10 mosaic. So what are the strides we use for the >>>>>>>>>>>> read? >>>>>>>>>>>> Well, the xstride is 4 because we're making room for an alpha >>>>>>>>>>>> channel that >>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't present in the file, the ystride is 640 (= 10*16*4), >>>>>>>>>>>> because each >>>>>>>>>>>> scanline of the little 10x10 image that you read needs to be >>>>>>>>>>>> placed on the >>>>>>>>>>>> proper scanline of the 160x50 mosaic you are assembling in memory. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- lg >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> P.S. Woo-hoo for making a Rust wrapper. I think that's a >>>>>>>>>>>> totally great thing. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2020, at 10:46 PM, Scott Wilson < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm experimenting with a Rust wrapper for OIIO, and had some >>>>>>>>>>>> questions about the stride. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Let's say I have an image that is 10x10 pixels, and 3 channels, >>>>>>>>>>>> and 1 byte per channel. What strides would be invalid for that >>>>>>>>>>>> image? I'm >>>>>>>>>>>> guessing that anything between -10 * 10 * 3 * 1 to 10 * 10 * 3 * 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> and the >>>>>>>>>>>> AutoStride would be valid, and everything else may try to access >>>>>>>>>>>> memory >>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't initialized. Is this assumption correct, or am I missing >>>>>>>>>>>> something? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oiio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >> >> >> -- >> Larry Gritz >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oiio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Oiio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >
_______________________________________________ Oiio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
