On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 08:32:07PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You could use XML for saving macros. Of course you could also use
> scheme BUT: There are libraries e.g. libxml which allow very simple 
> loading and saving of XML files while we would possibly have to write
> one for any other language first.

Well, we _do_ have gimp-perl available... With XML, we'd have to write
_both_ loader and saver -- with gimp-perl (or Perl-Fu, whatever name
you like best), we'll `just' have to add some saving hooks into the PDB
(hopefully -- I guess we'll have to add stuff elsewhere as well, but
when we get core/UI separation, this will be _much_ easier to do

I don't really see why you'd want to have XML for this -- it just
doesn't seem logical to me. It's a reason why people don't use it
elsewhere -- for instance, JavaScript was _not_ implemented as a load
of new tags -- they restricted themselves to one. (Well, OK, perhaps
that's not a very good argument, but the less junk you have to type in,
the better. I'd go crazy typing <> for each tag, and ="" for each
argument. No matter what you say, people will program any language
manually. Not everything is easily done with a macro recorder.)

/* Steinar */
Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/sneeze/

Reply via email to