Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 18:18, Daniel Rogers wrote: > Sven Neumann wrote: > > All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a > > full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation. > > Might I suggest Guile? > http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/guile.html > > It seems almost ready made to be stuck into the gimp. I have done some preliminary looking around the net related to Scheme interpreters. The use of Guile was proposed in messages I saw dated 1998. Back then it was felt the start up time for Guile was a little too long. I would hope that issue has been resolved in the intervening years. I have also seen references to guile-gtk as an extension for Guile, and a reference to a GIMP plug-in called 'gimple'. I haven't found copies of either of these two projects on the 'net yet. So far, I have grabbed copies of libscheme and the latest version of SIOD (v3.2) to take a look at them. A first step might be to replace the existing SIOD stuff with the 3.2 version but even that version of SIOD is very old and libscheme is even older. Based on comments in messages from years ago and recent comments, I will take a closer look at Guile. Developing a separate replacement for Script-Fu is the way to go. IIRC, this is how Script-Fu came about. Other items such as Xscanimage are able to be dropped in to GIMP at any time so the new interpreter could be done the same way. -- Cheers! Kevin. (http://www.interlog.com/~kcozens/) Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172|"What are we going to do today, Borg?" E-mail:kcozens at interlog dot com|"Same thing we always do, Pinkutus: Packet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]| Try to assimilate the world!" #include| -Pinkutus & the Borg ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Patch to remove deprecated constants from standard scripts
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 04:49, Sven Neumann wrote: > > Done. The patch affects 48 different scripts. It will allow for the > > eventual removal of some code in siod-wrapper.c (for the 2.2 release?). > > I don't think we want to break backward compatibility so this code > will have to stay. The code should certainly stay for the 2.0 release. I have made a script available that makes it easy to update scripts to the latest API. The compatibility could be removed as of 2.2 since we don't want to keep it indefinitely. However, the when isn't up to me unless I do come up with something to replace the existing Script-Fu extension. BTW, if you don't like the CHANNEL-OP enum, Sven, go head and change it. Let me know what you change it to in the rest of the system so I can ensure the Script-Fu system accepts the new constant and so I can update the standard GIMP scripts to use the new constant. -- Cheers! Kevin. (http://www.interlog.com/~kcozens/) Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172|"What are we going to do today, Borg?" E-mail:kcozens at interlog dot com|"Same thing we always do, Pinkutus: Packet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]| Try to assimilate the world!" #include| -Pinkutus & the Borg ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
Hi, Michael Natterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I agree 100% with everything Daniel said. SIOD is unmaintained crap > from the stone age. We should ditch it and use guile instead. I think the best approach will be to develop a Script-Fu replacement based on Guile (or another interpreter) separately from Script-Fu. When this implementation is mature enough to provide a way to run the existing scripts, we can drop Script-Fu. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
Daniel Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big dependency, and >>>people thought that gimp should come with at least one script interpreter >>>on it's own. >>> >>>(These are not my arguments, I just repeat what I think was one of the >>>bigger points back then). >> It was a point that I indeed support very strongly :) >> IMHO we should have at least one language where we can rely on the >> availability on *every* gimp installation. Basically this is impossible >> to guarantee for all languages that are packaged separately (like Perl, >> Python and Guile as well). >> I don't want to tell a newbie on Windows to install Python, because >> he >> needs it to e.g. run a simple script that applies a curve that depends >> on the current foreground color... (just a silly example). It'd be >> better to tell him "drop this file in that directory and invoke it" >> and I don't have to care whats his platform and what interpreters >> are installed. > > This is, I think, really shooting ourselves in the foot. By making > this choice, we are choosing to use a broken, out-of-date, scheme > interpreter when _much_ superior alternatives exist, because we don't > want to force installers in have to install another library. Isn't > that what installers do!? Guile is specifically designed to be an > extension language for applications. It is a shared library. It is a > perfect replacement for the gimp's soid bundle. > > (...) I agree 100% with everything Daniel said. SIOD is unmaintained crap from the stone age. We should ditch it and use guile instead. ciao, --mitch ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] gimp-help-2 preperations for our 1st release
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 18:22, Niklas Mattisson wrote: > Hey again, ... > * src/toolbox/tool-*.xml should change the line "Tool Call" to something > else. This is not correct english and I can't seem to find good > translation for the words either. Has anyone considered "Tool Menu Navigation"? It's a bit cumbersome, but has the advantage of being fairly common usage. I have no idea how it would translate to non-English languages. -- Daryl Lee 770-579-6588 (home) 770-971-7945 (office) ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
Simon Budig wrote: Marc Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0600, Tim Mooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate choice for replacing SIOD? As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big dependency, and people thought that gimp should come with at least one script interpreter on it's own. (These are not my arguments, I just repeat what I think was one of the bigger points back then). It was a point that I indeed support very strongly :) IMHO we should have at least one language where we can rely on the availability on *every* gimp installation. Basically this is impossible to guarantee for all languages that are packaged separately (like Perl, Python and Guile as well). I don't want to tell a newbie on Windows to install Python, because he needs it to e.g. run a simple script that applies a curve that depends on the current foreground color... (just a silly example). It'd be better to tell him "drop this file in that directory and invoke it" and I don't have to care whats his platform and what interpreters are installed. This is, I think, really shooting ourselves in the foot. By making this choice, we are choosing to use a broken, out-of-date, scheme interpreter when _much_ superior alternatives exist, because we don't want to force installers in have to install another library. Isn't that what installers do!? Guile is specifically designed to be an extension language for applications. It is a shared library. It is a perfect replacement for the gimp's soid bundle. The problem I see with this argument is: You are turning a packaging problem into a design choice. Suppose, for example, we choose to make siod a seperate dynamically linked library (included in the gimp sources, even). What is the difference between forcing you to install soid, and forcing you to install guile? The "not-creating-another-depency" argument is an illusion. soid is already a dependency. It is just a dependency we choose to include in the sources. Why did we do this? Is jpeglib included in the gimp source tarball? What about libppm? libpng? These are all dependencies. Should we include those in the tarball as well? It is true enough that you can argue that jpeglib is not as important as siod because you can disable the jpeg plugin on the configure command line. But this can be true for soid as well. While I don't immediatly see a ./configure option to disable script-fu, there is no technical reason why we can't have a configure option that disables script-fu. In fact, because you can disable script-fu, you cannot gaurentee that there exists a script system at all, let alone script-fu. Basically, the only real way to ensure that every single instance of the gimp has a scripting language installed is to package the gimp for every platform ourself. Not moving to something besides siod is *crippling* to our supported, which should be the best, extension language. So we should have at least one self contained language that comes with the GIMP. I am not exactly tied to Script-Fu, but I don't see any other obvious candidates. Guile is in all ways superior to siod, and is even self contained. We could even include a version of Guile in the tarball, which is what we do now with soid anyway. -- Dan ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
Marc Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0600, Tim Mooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate > > choice for replacing SIOD? > > As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big dependency, and > people thought that gimp should come with at least one script interpreter > on it's own. > > (These are not my arguments, I just repeat what I think was one of the > bigger points back then). It was a point that I indeed support very strongly :) IMHO we should have at least one language where we can rely on the availability on *every* gimp installation. Basically this is impossible to guarantee for all languages that are packaged separately (like Perl, Python and Guile as well). I don't want to tell a newbie on Windows to install Python, because he needs it to e.g. run a simple script that applies a curve that depends on the current foreground color... (just a silly example). It'd be better to tell him "drop this file in that directory and invoke it" and I don't have to care whats his platform and what interpreters are installed. So we should have at least one self contained language that comes with the GIMP. I am not exactly tied to Script-Fu, but I don't see any other obvious candidates. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] gimp-help-2 preperations for our 1st release
Hi, After discussions on IRC I made the desition to make a bugreport about the problems with "Tool Call" for the docs. The report is located at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133353 Also I talked to Sven and the others and according to Sven the word "freeze" is perhaps not well chosen. The release will be a pre release. But like roman said this release is here to get people more interested to start working harder with the docs and to get tests done. Best regards, -- Niklas Mattisson ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: Win GIMP
(Cc:ing to the gimp-developer list.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I wanted to add a feature to Windows Version of gimp but I don't > know how to get started developing for windows. It seems that the > dev site is mainly for the linux person. Or at least the > directions. Most of the current developers use some form of Unix (not just Linux AFAIK). Those that build GIMP on Windows either use the same tools as on Unix (i.e. the GNU auto tools, make, libtool, gcc), or use Microsoft's compiler (cl) and nmake. (I don't really count myself as a GIMP developer currently, as I haven't done any devlopment on the actual GIMP code in a long time. But I do build GIMP from source code now and then. I use the Unix-style tools.) Check out http://wiki.gimp.org/gimp/HowToCompileGimp_2fMicrosoftWindows . > I just wanted to add an SDI type view of GIMP, that way when you don't have all > the floaty windows. That is a rather large undertaking... Good luck. It might require support in GTK+ to be cleanly implementable. For your changes to have a chance of eventually being accepted into the official sources, you should keep your changes minimally obtrusive and follow the same coding style as the existing code. You also should be keeping your source code up-to-date with the code in the CVS repository. There probably already is some enhancement request in bugzilla.gnome.org for a SDI (or MDI?) type GIMP UI, but I can't find it right now. > (With any luck, it's probably already a feature and I just have to > click a checkbox) Nope. --tml ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0600, Tim Mooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate > choice for replacing SIOD? As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big dependency, and people thought that gimp should come with at least one script interpreter on it's own. (These are not my arguments, I just repeat what I think was one of the bigger points back then). -- -==- | ==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e| -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 11:52:29PM +0100, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Another thing that could be considered is to use a dedicated > interpreter instance for each script. Currently you cannot run two or > more scripts simultanously. Another problem that could be solved with this measure is that script-fu no longer needs to be in memory all the time and would get rid of the delay caused on startup. -- -==- | ==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e| -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
In regard to: Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript...: >All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a >full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation. Years ago, there was talk of switching to Guile, since that's what the GNU people were (are?) pushing as the language for scripting applications. I don't recall ever seeing why that was rejected, but talk of replacing SIOD with Guile just kind of died. Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate choice for replacing SIOD? Tim -- Tim Mooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] Information Technology Services (701) 231-1076 (Voice) Room 242-J6, IACC Building (701) 231-8541 (Fax) North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5164 ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] gimp-help-2 preperations for our 1st release
Hey again, Actually I have a few other things to remind everyone. * in src/toolbox/menu.xml the section about "GIMP Online" is still not translated that much. Not as far as I can see at least. That is translated and updated after I did the move of the object. * src/toolbox/tool-*.xml should change the line "Tool Call" to something else. This is not correct english and I can't seem to find good translation for the words either. The fact is that I have tried in a irc channel where there is a lot of translators and they said that I should bugreport this because it is not correct, and I agree with them that it sounds weird. Those are actually the main things I have been looking at right now. Hope that everyone understands what I am talking about. Regards, -- Niklas Mattisson ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
Sven Neumann wrote: All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation. Might I suggest Guile? http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/guile.html It seems almost ready made to be stuck into the gimp. -- Dan ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] gimp-help-2 preperations for our 1st release
tis 2004-02-03 klockan 11.02 skrev Roman Joost: > We're going to make a first release of the gimp-help-2. > > I want to inform the authors, to have a look over their written content > and make sure, that the release will not include major spelling or > grammar errors. The freeze of the sources will be on > next wednesday the 11th. > > Hopefully, this release will get some more attention of writing content > and fixing tiny errors for the manual. > > So, keep up the good work and let me know if there are any problems regarding > the release. > > Greetings, Hey, I will actually have problems getting the Swedish translation done before next wednesday. I have had so much in school at the moment and done so many other things at the same time that I have been kind of away of all the translations. However this weekend I will try to get more done at least most of the toolbox translations. Best regards, -- Niklas Mattisson ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
Hi, Kevin Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 04:48, Sven Neumann wrote: > > Well, it is not only used as a menu-path but also as a (short) > > description. Basically, Script-Fu is a mess. Wouldn't you want to > > rewrite it? We keep looking for someone who wants to redo Script-Fu > > for quite a while already. > > Looking at that again, you are right (of course). The menu path shows up > in the second line titled 'Blurb:' in DB Browser. This is good. I > remember a long time ago when this wasn't there. I would find something > in the browser I wanted to use but had trouble tracking down where it > was in the menus. > > I do seem to have painted a target (or at least a sign) on my back as > Script-Fu maintainer over the last number of days. :-) > > AFAIK, the Script-Fu stuff seems to be working. When you say you want > someone to redo it, can you be more specific as to what you feel needs > to be done to it? Probably the worst thing with the current Script-Fu interpreter is that its error reporting sucks. This makes it very hard to debug scripts. Then, the interpreter doesn't provide a full implementation of SIOD. There are a few things missing that would be extremely useful. For example functions to deal with the file-system so that one could write scripts that operate on directories or files that match a regular expression. All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation. Perhaps things would also already improve if the SIOD implementation in Script-Fu would be updated to the latest release which is, iirc, albeit being 8 years old, still two years newer than what we use currently. Another thing that could be considered is to use a dedicated interpreter instance for each script. Currently you cannot run two or more scripts simultanously. > the moment I hit a call to write_channel and the GTK+ documentation > I have often found lacking. I'll try and track down some good GTK+ > tutorials since I want to be able to do more GUI related programming > in Linux. I suggest you also make yourself comfortable with GObject and would like to point you to this very nice tutorial: http://le-hacker.org/papers/gobject/ Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 04:48, Sven Neumann wrote: > Well, it is not only used as a menu-path but also as a (short) > description. Basically, Script-Fu is a mess. Wouldn't you want to > rewrite it? We keep looking for someone who wants to redo Script-Fu > for quite a while already. Looking at that again, you are right (of course). The menu path shows up in the second line titled 'Blurb:' in DB Browser. This is good. I remember a long time ago when this wasn't there. I would find something in the browser I wanted to use but had trouble tracking down where it was in the menus. I do seem to have painted a target (or at least a sign) on my back as Script-Fu maintainer over the last number of days. :-) AFAIK, the Script-Fu stuff seems to be working. When you say you want someone to redo it, can you be more specific as to what you feel needs to be done to it? I might be able to start with small changes or patches to Script-Fu at first. However, GIMP itself and GTK+ have gotten a lot bigger and more complex over the years. I usually get lost following things in the GIMP the moment I hit a call to write_channel and the GTK+ documentation I have often found lacking. I'll try and track down some good GTK+ tutorials since I want to be able to do more GUI related programming in Linux. -- Cheers! Kevin. (http://www.interlog.com/~kcozens/) Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172|"What are we going to do today, Borg?" E-mail:kcozens at interlog dot com|"Same thing we always do, Pinkutus: Packet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]| Try to assimilate the world!" #include| -Pinkutus & the Borg ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP Update
Le mar 03/02/2004 à 11:12, Dave Neary a écrit : > Sorry - excuse the omission - I have understood that you were now the main .fr > GIMP docs contributor. Merci Julien for les docs en francais. > Julien wrote : - french translation of main tools - english and french doc for color tools - english and french doc for the fisrt part of the filters : Blur/ color / Noise / Edge / Enhance / Generic (some filters are still not committed in CVS) - english translation for my path tool and corrections of my dialogs doc I only wrote : - doc for path tool in french, layer (not in CVS) and channel doc in french and english (And also many works on fr.po) Comme tu peux le voir, merci pour les docs en français n'est donc toujours pas correct... et de très loin. > > L'oublier c'est une insulte grave aux contributeurs !!! > > As I know, Sven did'nt wrote any chapter (thank you for install script > > aniway). > > Excusez moi tous - j'ai bien sûr pas été complète, et je voulais surtout pas > insulter qui que ce soit. > Je me doute bien qu'il n'y rien de volontaire mais ce genre de gaffe peut froisser énormément les gens. Fais attention SVP car les contributeurs sont rares... ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP Update
Hi Raymond, raymond ostertag wrote: Aside from that, there's lots of stuff happenning outside CVS too... the help team recently did a pre-release of the gimp-help-2 module, and it's looking very good. Roman, Daniel, Raymond, Niklas, Sven and everyone else who is working on the help right now are doing a great job. s/sven/julien Perhaps s/sven/julien and sven/? Sven's put quite a bit of time into the docs recently, and it's because of him that we can now make snapshots that actually install. I consider that Julien is a main doc-writer. Sorry - excuse the omission - I have understood that you were now the main .fr GIMP docs contributor. Merci Julien for les docs en francais. L'oublier c'est une insulte grave aux contributeurs !!! As I know, Sven did'nt wrote any chapter (thank you for install script aniway). Excusez moi tous - j'ai bien sûr pas été complète, et je voulais surtout pas insulter qui que ce soit. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] gimp-help-2 preperations for our 1st release
We're going to make a first release of the gimp-help-2. I want to inform the authors, to have a look over their written content and make sure, that the release will not include major spelling or grammar errors. The freeze of the sources will be on next wednesday the 11th. Hopefully, this release will get some more attention of writing content and fixing tiny errors for the manual. So, keep up the good work and let me know if there are any problems regarding the release. Greetings, -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [Gimp-developer] Changes needed to DB Browser content?
Hi, Kevin Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm not sure what the difference is between Script-Fu and the > "abstract PDB language". DB Browser, IMHO, should allow you to see the > names of functions/plug-ins, a list of the arguments that are > required, what each argument is for, and the range of constants (by > name and value) that can be used for each argument. It could (should?) > also include any useful notes such as gotchas, limitations, conditions > of use (for the function or argument), or generally useful tidbits of > information akin to the type of stuff in "tip of the day" that you see > on startup. ie. the function that creates a new image could have a > note saying to use the function to create a new layer as the next > logical/typical thing to do. > > This descriptive included after the argument list should be kept short > and not be a simple re-iteration of what you can learn from the > argument information above (as is the currently the case for a number > of function descriptions). > > The DB Browser should not include examples of the invocation of a > given function. I think that would get too much in to the specific > syntax for a given plug-in language. That should be considered beyond > the scope of the contents of DB Browser. Language specific information > should be part of the help system of the GIMP or more likely in > external documentation. Actually I don't think DB Browser is actually very well suited for this job. The API reference is a lot more useable already although perhaps it lacks the search capabilities of the DB Browser. However you will have noticed that the API reference manuals contain basically the same info as displayed by the DB Browser. This is because it's all generated from the same source. So the best thing to do if you want to improve both the API docs and the DB Browser is to send patches to improve the PDB documentation. In the long run we plan to revamp the PDB. When redesigning the PDB, documentation should play an important role. I don't think it makes sense to stick to procedures that are defined and documented in C code. A procedure definition could be an XML file or some simple s-exp syntax. Such a file could contain elaborate descriptions that wouldn't have to be compiled into the GIMP application but could be parsed on demand by the DB Browser and the tools that generate the API reference manuals. > I won't make any changes related to DB Browser information until it > is confirmed that changes are needed, what they need to be (at least > in a general sense. ie. move things towards language X), and which > files need to be updated (ie. ones ending in .c or is it .pdb with > the .c files generated from that?). Perhaps you want to read HACKING. It will answer at least some of your questions. Personally I don't think the information displayed by the DB Browser should be changed towards any language. The GIMP language bindings will always have a different syntax and I don't see why the DB Browser should favorite a particular language. Changing the DB Browser will most probably lead to more confusion than it would be helpful. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?
Hi, Kevin Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In the file plug-ins/script-fu/script-fu-scripts.c is a typedef for > SFScript. The third member is 'description'. The contents of the > structure is filled in by the routine script_fu_add_script() further > down the file. This routine is processing the arguments of the > script-fu-register call located at the end of a Script-Fu based script. > It uses the second argument of script-fu-register to set the value of > 'description' in the SFScript structure. > > I see this as misleading. It is not a description of the script but more > of a menu path. The following item (referred to as 'help') contains more > in the way of an actual description of a script. > > I think it would make more sense to change 'description' to something > like 'menupath'. It would be more indicative of its actual use. Well, it is not only used as a menu-path but also as a (short) description. Basically, Script-Fu is a mess. Wouldn't you want to rewrite it? We keep looking for someone who wants to redo Script-Fu for quite a while already. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Patch to remove deprecated constants from standard scripts
Hi, Kevin Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 18:42, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > > Please do that - bugzilla helps us track bugs along with patches and > > enhancement requests much better than a mailing list does. > > Done. The patch affects 48 different scripts. It will allow for the > eventual removal of some code in siod-wrapper.c (for the 2.2 release?). I don't think we want to break backward compatibility so this code will have to stay. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
