On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> Should using an IWarp tool mean entering a separate "mode" where you
> then have to "apply and exit" it when done? That is somewhat ugly,
> isn't it?
That's how the Scissors tool works, so people are already used to it.
This way, a separate warp history could be maintained in the tool area
which could allow reverting arbitrary strokes. With GEGL, it might even
be possible to re-open and revise a warp layer at a later time.
> In a non-destructive GEGLified future, that probably doesn't matter much
> as the calculation of updated actual image pixels can be done in the
> background (as long as the preview is correct enough), or something.
This doesn't mean the warp 'strokes' shouldn't be understood as a single
warping operation. The (yet invisible) grid they affect defines the way
the drawable sould be transformed. This is not equivalent to composing
several transformations (think of the 'Remove' deform mode).
Gimp-developer mailing list