On Thursday 19 May 2005 03:51, Jan Olof wrote:
Hello! I wonder if the macro recorder will be implemented soon in
Gimp? I guess that it would be good if it generates Scheme script
code.
It would be very great if there was possible to use a macro on
every picture in the GAP image range.
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 08:51:03AM +0200, Jan Olof wrote:
Hello! I wonder if the macro recorder will be implemented soon in Gimp?
I guess that it would be good if it generates Scheme script code.
It would be very great if there was possible to use a macro on every
picture in the GAP image
Hello! I wonder if the macro recorder will be implemented soon in Gimp?
I guess that it would be good if it generates Scheme script code.
It would be very great if there was possible to use a macro on every
picture in the GAP image range.
Could I contribute in some way? I'm a college educated
[already sent off-list by mistake]
At 17:15 23.06.03 +0200, Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
Nathan Carl Summers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In short the approach (more info in bugzilla) :
- Intercept every PDB call if a macro recorder instance is running.
The cvs version of Libpdb already provides a
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 22:40:56 +0200, Hans Breuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 07:01 23.06.03 -0700, Nathan Carl Summers wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Hans Breuer wrote:
(try to guess the call stack depth to avoid recording functions
called by a plug-in)
I had a solution to that problem,
Hi,
Hans Breuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But perhaps this just means that the Undo system needs to be
hooked into the PDB as well ?!
It would certainly be useful to have that capability. Though if
the user is used to macro recording he would probably be able
to change the brush selction
Hi,
Nathan Carl Summers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In short the approach (more info in bugzilla) :
- Intercept every PDB call if a macro recorder instance is running.
The cvs version of Libpdb already provides a flexible mechanism for
intercepting pdb calls. I designed it with macro
At 07:01 23.06.03 -0700, Nathan Carl Summers wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Hans Breuer wrote:
I'm about to give it another try with current cvs code
base, but before I would like to get some information
to avoid (if possible) fast rotting bits.
In short the approach (more info in bugzilla) :
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Hans Breuer wrote:
I'm about to give it another try with current cvs code
base, but before I would like to get some information
to avoid (if possible) fast rotting bits.
In short the approach (more info in bugzilla) :
- Intercept every PDB call if a macro recorder
Hi,
Hans Breuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- Intercept every PDB call if a macro recorder instance is running.
(try to guess the call stack depth to avoid recording functions
called by a plug-in)
That would mean that all actions go through the PDB. The fact is that
no user action goes
At 15:20 20.06.03 +0200, Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
Hans Breuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- Intercept every PDB call if a macro recorder instance is running.
(try to guess the call stack depth to avoid recording functions
called by a plug-in)
That would mean that all actions go through
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 16:50:37 +0200, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hans Breuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is the all-or-nothing argument. IMO a macro recorder
would already be useful if it only records the calls done
as reaction on users menu usage, where many go through the
12 matches
Mail list logo