Daniel Rogers <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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 then). >> It was a point that I indeed support very strongly :) >> 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 well). >> I don't want to tell a newbie on Windows to install Python, because >> he >> needs it to e.g. run a simple script that applies a curve that depends >> on the current foreground color... (just a silly example). It'd be >> better to tell him "drop this file in that directory and invoke it" >> and I don't have to care whats his platform and what interpreters >> are installed. > > This is, I think, really shooting ourselves in the foot. By making > this choice, we are choosing to use a broken, out-of-date, scheme > interpreter when _much_ superior alternatives exist, because we don't > want to force installers in have to install another library. Isn't > that what installers do!? Guile is specifically designed to be an > extension language for applications. It is a shared library. It is a > perfect replacement for the gimp's soid bundle. > > (...) I agree 100% with everything Daniel said. SIOD is unmaintained crap from the stone age. We should ditch it and use guile instead. ciao, --mitch
