> I don't like how you nest the various let*-statements. That makes the
> code hard to track.
> It would be better if you have some dummy variable declarations in your
> outer let*-statement and then use set! to redefine the values.
> Also note that the use of "25" for the mode is not nice, you really
> should use the symbolic constants.

These issues are because my code is randomly generated using a
Script-fu syntax tree I wrote.  I'll add indentation to the
AST/Script-fu compiler and that should make things easier to read.
Not sure how to handle the side-effects of flattening, I'll think on
it more.

> You should be concerned moderately, since your code apparently is doing
> some bogus stuff and does not properly keep track of the layers in the
> image. However, the critical warning should not happen, we really should
> catch these errors in the PDB wrappers already.

It's a little more concerning to me that I found 1 infinite loop that
nearly crashed my system (took a while to register, but I finally
killed gimp-console) and several memory bugs where a gimp plugin
requests gigabytes of memory (and then fails).  Also, values aren't
garbage collected after fails scripts thus my constant testing lead to
a gimp-console taking nearly all of my 4GB of RAM; this forced me to
stop using GIMP for the project.  After I finish with this project I'd
be happy to re-generate some of the buggy scripts and post to the
developers list if you'd like - somewhat like BNF fuzzing script-fu

Thanks Simon,
Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to