What are you advocating instead? Perhaps I just missed something but I have not been able to figure out what change you are proposing. The issue you raise has been around forever and it seems that so far you are the first one to find it disturbing enough to talk about it.
I thought I had explained it in the bug report I filed but I will me try to make it clearer.
In regards to the second point, perhaps it has disturbed other people but not enough to have mentioned it. you said yourself, Sven, in a comment to a bugzilla entry something to the effect that no one has expressed an interest in Script-Fu. I am still interested in Script-Fu. I am involved in a number of other projects so I haven't made the time to learn how to do a C-based plug-in. I find it easier to use Script-Fu to make a script that automates a set of steps I came up with to automate a procedure.
In regards to the first point, I am advocating that the enum values shown in DB Browser (for C) be the same as the ones used in Script-Fu scripts (and other language bindings) to provide a better level of consistency across all plug-ins. That way, something you learned to use in one plug-in language doesn't have to be unlearned when you use a different language for plug-ins.
For example, if I look in DB Browser for creating a new image, one of the enums shown for argument type is GIMP_RGB_IMAGE. So, since I know for Script-Fu scripts I use - in place of _, I would use GIMP-RGB-IMAGE. When I try running a script with this as things stand now, I will get an error message and be left scratching my head wondering what is wrong with the script since I followed the information shown in DB Browser.
You, I, and many people on this list may have the source code available on their machines to figure out what the Script-Fu constants are as compared to what is shown in DB Browser but how many others will? Lately, I only update the collection of scripts on my web page to work with the latest GIMP when API changes. This means it can be a long time from one session of working with Script-Fu to another at my end. The handiest reference I have to refresh me on Script-Fu functions and their arguments is the DB Browser.
An alternative would be to have a section of the help system explain that the information in DB Browser is for C plug-ins and provide a list showing the mapping between C enums to those of Script-Fu. This would still mean I have to dig through the help system when the DB Browser is still the quickest "help" system to access. Also, the help system can lag behind the state of the code at times too so it is not the best method during times of big changes.
It would be easier if I could use GIMP-RGB-IMAGE in Script-Fu scripts as I would be led to believe from DB Browser. The only change needed to DB Browser would be adding the display of a comment before (or after) the functions entry information stating something like "For Script-Fu scripts, change the _ in function names and arguments to -".
Perhaps something should be done about this but I don't think it's a severe problem that would justify an incompatible change to any of the language bindings.
If we are to make such a change, now is the time to do it. After all, we are going from a 1.2 release to a 2.0 release so it is to be expected that changes would need to be made to plug-ins from 1.2 to make them work in the new 2.0 version. The next opportunity to make a change would be for 2.2 which might be another year or two down the road but one wouldn't expect such incompatibilities in a "minor" bump in version (2.0 to 2.2).
Changing enums (if one doesn't add new ones and make the old ones deprecated for a while) would mean most (or all) supplied scripts would need to be updated. I have a perl script which updates Script-Fu scripts from the 1.2 to 2.0 versions of the GIMP (except for three functions which have different argument lists). If enums were to change for Script-Fu it would be relatively easy to enhance my script to handle changes to enums as well. BTW, I will make the script available soon for others to try in case there are others out there who find old scripts they want to use with the 2.0 version of GIMP.
PS. To all, please don't reply to messages I post to the list AND CC: me as well. Doing so gives me two copies of your message and I get enough e-mail already. I have been a subscriber to this list, and made my small contributions to the GIMP, since the days of the 0.9 series of the GIMP. I have been on gimp-announce too since late 1997.
Cheers!
Kevin. (http://www.interlog.com/~kcozens/)
Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 |"What are we going to do today, Borg?" E-mail:kcozens at interlog dot com|"Same thing we always do, Pinkutus: Packet:ve3syb@ve3yra.#con.on.ca.na| Try to assimilate the world!" #include <disclaimer/favourite> | -Pinkutus & the Borg
