Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-09 Thread pcg
On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 07:35:08PM -0800, Manish Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: currently, and go beyond that with a full gtk and gimp binding. The same should be done for python (I have plans to do this) and perl, the idea being having languages besides C that can use the entire gimp API.

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-09 Thread Manish Singh
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 08:35:04AM +0100, Marc A. Lehmann wrote: On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 07:35:08PM -0800, Manish Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: currently, and go beyond that with a full gtk and gimp binding. The same should be done for python (I have plans to do this) and perl, the idea

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-09 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Manish Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh sure, out of all the bindings, perl comes closest by far to full coverage. But iirc it doesn't wrap libgimpcolor, libgimpmath, some of libgimpwidgets, and libgimpthumb. We will have to make the libgimp APIs more language binding friendly then.

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-09 Thread Manish Singh
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 11:58:15AM +0100, Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Manish Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh sure, out of all the bindings, perl comes closest by far to full coverage. But iirc it doesn't wrap libgimpcolor, libgimpmath, some of libgimpwidgets, and libgimpthumb. We

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-09 Thread pcg
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 12:53:40AM -0800, Manish Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh sure, out of all the bindings, perl comes closest by far to full coverage. But iirc it doesn't wrap libgimpcolor, libgimpmath, some of libgimpwidgets, and libgimpthumb. Ah yes, I haven't looked into the new

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-08 Thread Manish Singh
On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 04:14:10PM +0100, Marc A. Lehmann wrote: Simons agruments, however, smell a lot of standard gimp extension language, because his goal is to have one language that is always pat of gimp, which would effectively be a standard. I don't think that's a bad idea at all,

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Include a GUILE in the Gimp sourcecode, make sure that it doesn't conflict with other GUILEs on the target system and use it as the GIMPs default language. Perfectly fine with me as long as I have a language that is guaranteed to be available for 99% of the

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Dave Neary
Hi, Sven Neumann wrote: Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Include a GUILE in the Gimp sourcecode, make sure that it doesn't conflict with other GUILEs on the target system and use it as the GIMPs default language. Perfectly fine with me as long as I have a language that is guaranteed to be available

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm with Simon - at least one scripting language installation's a good idea. We might assume that perl or python are more or less universally available, but we can certainly not assume that guile is always installed. Given the fact that script-fu has

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Simon Budig
Dave Neary ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: We might assume that perl or python are more or less universally available, [...] Please note that this definitely is wrong. We have a Windows user base and they most probably don't have Perl or Python installed. Otherwise I wouldn't bring this topic up.

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Dave Neary
Hello, Sven Neumann wrote: It's just a packaging issue. As long as we make sure that everyone can install gimp-script-fu, we have script-fu support. Do you really want to continue to include it with GIMP with all the problems that arise from doing that? I don't think it's worth it. Including

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Simon Budig
Ooops, that should have been gone to the ML as well... Sven Neumann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Include a GUILE in the Gimp sourcecode, make sure that it doesn't conflict with other GUILEs on the target system and use it as the GIMPs default language.

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread pcg
On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 01:06:58PM +0100, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think we should do that simply because I don't see what is so important about having a self-contained scripting language. I'd rather like to see three or four well-maintained and working scripting languages

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Dave Neary
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann ) wrote: On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 01:06:58PM +0100, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think we should do that simply because I don't see what is so important about having a self-contained scripting language. I'd rather like to see three or four

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Including guile doesn't mean supporting it. As it is, there are a bunch of things we include that don't get much support because the original authors have gone their own way. This time we're not even talking about *pretending* that this is a GIMP

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Henrik Brix Andersen
On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 16:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Simons agruments, however, smell a lot of standard gimp extension language, because his goal is to have one language that is always pat of gimp, which would effectively be a standard. I don't think that's a bad idea at all, especially when

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually, most GIMP users probably get their GIMP from Jernej - OK - the GNU/Linux side of things gives us a nice big install base on Linux, but proportionately very few Linux people actually *use* the GIMP. I'd guess that the majority of our power

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-05 Thread Dave Neary
Hi, Sven Neumann wrote: Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd guess that the majority of our power users are on Win32. Are there any numbers you can base this statement on? No, it's a guess. Not that it would matter much but I doubt there are more Win32 GIMP users than Linux GIMP users.

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-04 Thread Simon Budig
Daniel Rogers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Simon Budig wrote: IMHO we should have at least one language where we can rely on the availability on *every* gimp installation. Basically this is impossible to guarantee for all languages that are packaged separately (like Perl, Python and Guile as

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Kevin Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In the file plug-ins/script-fu/script-fu-scripts.c is a typedef for SFScript. The third member is 'description'. The contents of the structure is filled in by the routine script_fu_add_script() further down the file. This routine is processing the

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Kevin Cozens
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 04:48, Sven Neumann wrote: Well, it is not only used as a menu-path but also as a (short) description. Basically, Script-Fu is a mess. Wouldn't you want to rewrite it? We keep looking for someone who wants to redo Script-Fu for quite a while already. Looking at that

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Kevin Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 04:48, Sven Neumann wrote: Well, it is not only used as a menu-path but also as a (short) description. Basically, Script-Fu is a mess. Wouldn't you want to rewrite it? We keep looking for someone who wants to redo Script-Fu

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Daniel Rogers
Sven Neumann wrote: All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation. Might I suggest Guile? http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/guile.html It seems almost ready made to be stuck into the gimp. -- Dan

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Tim Mooney
In regard to: Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript...: All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation. Years ago, there was talk of switching to Guile, since that's what the GNU people were

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread pcg
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 11:52:29PM +0100, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another thing that could be considered is to use a dedicated interpreter instance for each script. Currently you cannot run two or more scripts simultanously. Another problem that could be solved with this measure

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread pcg
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0600, Tim Mooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate choice for replacing SIOD? As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big dependency, and people thought that gimp should come with at

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Simon Budig
Marc Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0600, Tim Mooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate choice for replacing SIOD? As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big dependency, and

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Daniel Rogers
Simon Budig wrote: Marc Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0600, Tim Mooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate choice for replacing SIOD? As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Michael Natterer
Daniel Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big dependency, and people thought that gimp should come with at least one script interpreter on it's own. (These are not my arguments, I just repeat what I think was one of the bigger points back

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, Michael Natterer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree 100% with everything Daniel said. SIOD is unmaintained crap from the stone age. We should ditch it and use guile instead. I think the best approach will be to develop a Script-Fu replacement based on Guile (or another interpreter)

Re: [Gimp-developer] Misnamed structure element in SFScript structure?

2004-02-03 Thread Kevin Cozens
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 18:18, Daniel Rogers wrote: Sven Neumann wrote: All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation. Might I suggest Guile? http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/guile.html It seems almost