On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 06:53:28PM +0100, Michael Natterer wrote:
> >> Manish Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Well, something has to generate those coords, and something has to update
> > the UI before painting is finished.
> >
> > I was asking more in terms of an API should look like. Interactive
> > paint is more involved than say, a bucket fill, which is easily translated
> > into to "call PDB bucket fill function on button release".
> IMHO this is not a big issue, since even today PDB painting uses almost
> the same functions as interactive painting does. The only difference
> is that PDB painting flushes the stuff at the end while interactive
> painting flushes while painting.
> So everything that would have to be changed is replacing the call
> to gimp_paint_core_interpolate() by some_generated_pdb_paint_foo()
> and flush the display in between. Not a big deal i'd say.
> (What I want to say is that painting has been abstracted well
> enough to enable stroke recording without changing too much).
> But then you are right, maybe we need a new API because it's
> perhaps cleaner to just draw the stuff as we do now and to
> create the recorded entry on button_release()

Right, it wouldn't be hard to adapt the code to do this. But we should
nail down a sane API...

We could simply bypass the pdb for painting, and just emit "record this"
on button release. But maybe it'd be better to have the pdb more involved,
I dunno.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to