[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2001-05-28 at 0542.02 +0300):
> I use spaces to indent, because that's how I configured my editor (gvim).
> However, some other users may use tabs, and I don't see anything wrong
> with that.
What Sven said, any coder should know it. It is a PITA to see how code
looks differently, and by Murphy's law, the worst look is in the
printed copy you have to show the teacher (or the one you make public
if speaking about porjects in general).
> style which puts all the ")"'s on the last line. I prefer C-like style
> like that:
All lisp users I know will kill you. Dunno why, but they will. Maybe
it is a secret tradition nobody talks about. I am really newbie, but I
accepted and passed to make things work. ;]
> I once sent a message to a mailing-list, I'm a member of, asking why the
> Scheme style was not indeed so. The reply I received did not convince me
> that it was a good idea. You can find it at:
You use vim, no? Place over a ( or ), and hit %, see how the cursor
jumps to the matching ) or ( (and % again to go back). Emacs shows
info as you add the ending ), and you can jump arround with C-M-f and
C-M-b (keycombos discovered today, BTW, until now I just deleted and
In general, I think the replies 501 and 503 you got are more or less
on target, based in all the talk I have seen about it. It is the way
it has been done mostly, and everybody serious about coding has a nice
editor that helps and parses whatever languaje you use (view code in a
web browser? eeek! I hope it has been parsed with one of those apps
that add colours to source in HTML, at least).
BTW, if somebody wants to create another lisp version (rep), you can
not forbid it, mainly cos the project could be that (my Univ is full
of things nobody will use, but could be, and more if projects were
planned with that in mind), or cos the person wanted to do it himself.
I do not see the problem buying furniture done or building your own.
> In any case, if your lines get too long, one should probably out-source
> part of the code as a different function. Most Script-Fu scripts are
> almost completely linear so it's not a very big concern.
Until you call a plugin with ten items.
> Do you want not to accept scripts that do not follow this regulation?
As HACKING says, the core things must follow the rules, and the rest
should too. That way the maintainer job can be passed from ones to
others as needed, core code or not.
> > - use "foo" string for logos. [which string? logo name? "the gimp"?]
> I'd rather people each used the string of each choice. It adds to the
> scripts' colour. (I really like Bovination's "Fear the Cow")
Using the name of the script will allow people to see which one
generates that. Using "The GIMP" will give the origin. Another should
be to use a phrase with common letters so you see how it will behave,
ascends and descents, etc. Where is Cameron when we are talking about
> Script-Fu has the advantage of being easier to compile than the other
> scripting interfaces. However, for most practical reasons, I believe I
> would prefer scripting with perl, because I can do everything perl does in
> Gimp-Perl scripts. (files, sockets, CPAN modules and all)
IIRC Gimp-Perl is not included in Windows version. I must be sick, cos
I am caring for Windows users.
> Script-Fu uses SIOD, which is not an R4RS compatible Scheme
> implementation. (For instance, "set!" can create a new variable). Does
> anybody know what became of the guile bindings?
No idea. But making the Python binding default too would be nice. And
both should have some rules (Python already forces you, anyway).
Gimp-developer mailing list