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 this choice, we are choosing to use a broken, out-of-date, scheme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.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to