On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 08:32:07PM +0100, Daniel.Egger@xxxxxxx 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 cleanly). 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/
