On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 03:06:10PM -0700, christopher baus <christopher@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> something like perl, but that's IMHO. I know a lot of people aren't down
> with functional programming languages.
(... like perl ;)
Anyway, it seems nobody has the time and energy to really work on the
needed changes in script-fu to make it a viable programming environment.
> More generally is it possible for script-fu scripts to introduce memory
> leaks even tough scheme in itself is a garbage collected language?
In script-fu it shouldn't be possible to enerate memory leaks, but a
plug-in (like script-fu) can easily create memory lekas within the main
gimp application. This is not easy to solve, and the question is wether
it should be "solved" for all cases (I can think of a lot of cases where
holding images inside the gimp for cahcing reasions makes a lot of sense,
without them being actively referenced).
> I need to pass an image and a drawable? If I load an image, do some image
> level manipulations on it, and then want to save it with gimp-image-save,
> do I need to create a layer?
If your image doesn not already have a layer you have nothing to save,
so just use the existing layer. If you are sure your save plug-in
does not depend on the layer (most don't) you can also pass in -1 or
gimp_image_layer_active (or whatever its called).
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
