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 <yosh@xxxxxxxx> 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. > > Hmm, at least during the 1.2 era, perl did have access to the full API > (i.e. low-level pixel access, full UI transparency etc.), and right now I > don't think something important has been added that is not accessible (as > opposed to parts that haven't been converted to the new API). > > I mean, in the sense of "you can write plug-ins indistinguishable from > plug-ins wirtten in C", this was possible in perl for a long time already. > > However, very few authors have used these features, and only two perl > plug-ins, both written by me, use their own Gtk-UI instead of relying on > Gimp::Fu, so I guess the demand for the latter power in perl is pretty > low. > > (I might err and there are lots out there, perl developers have this > tendency of doing stuff for themselves without polishing & publishing > them...) 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. I'd like to see more bindings that let you do everything a C plugin does, so people have language choice when it comes to writing things, which could mean a larger pool of plugin coders. It's also nice to have a quick way of trying out new algorithms. -Yosh
