On 16 Jan., 23:26, Bruno Postle <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes a python interface is very interesting. > > There are some bits of the code that would benefit from being in a > language that doesn't require a 15 minute recompile with every > change - e.g. what happens when you click the Align... button. > Ultimately there could be an advantage to having the GUI elements in > python, but this would be a major change. precisely! I've now had my first tastes of these new opportunities when I was testing my plugin interface. Once the call goes into the Python interpreter, it is dispatched further with a python script. All of the sudden I could make a modification to the code and instantly test it! It was like the feeling you get when you've carried a heavy backpack all day and then take it off and walk a few steps. > What we do need is to have the python interface in the Hugin tree > and built as a compile time option. I've prepared everything for this; as I've written to Pablo, the plugin capability can be pulled into the hugin code anywhere by a mere inclusion of a single header which introduces no further dependencies, so switching such an inclusion on and off with a #define is easy. Linking in or not linking in the object code to interface with Python and the Python libraries should also be straightforward, but better fixed by someone with more CMake experience than me. Kay -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
