On Wednesday 21 November 2001 16:58, Robinson, Mike wrote:
> Sterling Hughes writes:
> > Really, I've *never* come across a piece of code that used
> > imagemagick. I think it definitely does have a use, don't get
> > me wrong, I'm just doubting that the use is widespread enough to
> > be in PHP's cvs currently...
>
> Well it's taken several years but finally you posted
> something I don't agree with. :)
>
Wow, several years, that almost seems too long :)
> So imagemagick would be less popular than, say, Ovrimos, YAZ(eesh),
> SESAM, Cr�dit Mutuel CyberMUT...
>
no, I don't remember saying these belonged in PHP's CVS,
they are there for a large part imho legacy reasons and laziness
(ie, not enough bitching when they were proprosed).
> I could see imagemagick giving gd a real run for its money
> in the PHP extension popularity contest, particularly after
> it has matured and had its featureset (hint hint..) enhanced.
>
I couldn't... The library its based on is somewhat ugly, furthermore,
its slower from what I can see... Currently its not enhanced and
its not that important.
> Perhaps if it were added to the base code the author would be more
> inclined to enhance/update/maintain it. Just a thought anyways.
>
Why? Because its in PHP's cvs, the neatness of that grows old
very quick :)
-Sterling
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
