I've writing started such CPython bindings yesterday - in time we should expose the buffers in a proper way. https://github.com/jsbueno/python-gegl What is difficult to do via pygobject bindings is to make use of GEGL itself - the linked example file of yesterday sepeaks for itself. While GEGL in C has provisions for function calls to be made emulating named parameters from Python, for, for example, setting various properties at once, I didn't get that to work from Python. Moreover, a Python user wll rather do: pngnode.path = "myfile.png" - rather than "pngnode.set_property("path", "myfile.png") as is required by the automated bindings. Daniel - if you are into it, I've hit a but at my first steps: when using GParamSpec objects (via an operation_list_properties call) I had the Python interpreter segfaulting (it happens on trying to introspect the GParamSpec objects with "dir", but in other occasions I could not isolate as well) js -><- On 29 November 2013 05:31, Daniel Sabo <danielsabo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Assuming were talking about gegl-master here, what are you unable to > do via introspection? The introspection bindings have full coverage of > the GEGL API. Mainipulating pixels directly (rather than though > operations) involves more copying in Python than is C because Python > has no concept of mutable buffers. It would be possible to expose > things via ctypes or numpy, but that requires writing a CPython module > and will probably not be part of GEGL itself. > > To get/set raw pixels from from a gegl buffer use Buffer.get(...) and > Buffer.set(...). _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
