On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Ondrej Certik<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 8:30 PM, David Joyner<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
...
>
> So what are the arguments against PIL and for VIPS?
Here are two reasons ("Why use VIPS?")
http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/supported/7.18/doc/html/vipsmanual/vipsmanualse13.html#x20-850003.1
and ("libvips overview") http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/index.php?title=Libvips
In particular, it is scalable and certainly more "state of the art" than PIL.
The page http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/index.php?title=Speed_and_Memory_Use
explains how it is faster than PIL, Octave, Imagemagick, and others.
>
> What I hate about PIL is the lack of docstrings with example doctests.
> But honestly, I hate this about Python standard library too!
>
...
>
> http://www.pythonware.com/library/pil/handbook/index.htm
> which is not bad, but sphinx is better.
VIPS has much better documentation, however, it is written in C++ with
swig Python
wrappers (http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/index.php?title=Python) , so
it is better to read
http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/supported/7.18/doc/html/vipsmanual/vipsmanual.html
or the man pages for each command
http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/supported/7.18/doc/html/man/
Needed are pythonic docstrings though.
This is a more complicated package than PIL, but I think one should work with it
(which I plan to do) before proposing what Sage should include.
>
> Ondrej
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
