On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 02:34:28PM -0400, woc wrote: > On 8/24/05, Manish Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, the python bindings are disted with GIMP, though not on Windows. > > This will change with GIMP 2.4 though. > > > > If you care about Windows, you should've said so from the beginning. ;) > > You're basically stuck with C for 2.2, script-fu won't cut it. > > ... and I was almost sure I mentioned that portability is a priority for me. > I apologize for failng to ennumerate the current and potential > future platforms I might hope to let people use. </wry>
Yeah, and you contradicted this statement when you said that C wasn't portable enough for you. There are differing definitions of what "portability" means. > Oh well, looks like C it is, with all the non-portability that implies. > I was hoping for more generic abstractions. You could patch script-fu to do what you want, or you could deploy pygimp or gimp-perl to your users, since they are running a custom app anyway... It's up to you how much you want to constrain yourself. -Yosh _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
