I am not a GIMP developer, though I have been a spectator on this list for a while now.

I suggest that you specify exactly what you are trying, and what exactly you are looking for.

A detailed work-flow and a UI mock-up image would best describe what you want.

Specify the problem.. not the solution. I HTH .

On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 4:44 AM, Luis A. Florit wrote:

Sorry, I thought I was clear enough (did I specify the solution??) What I want to do is what is pretty standard in these cases:

You were certainly clear enough, but there is no way to do that using script-fu. If you need fine control of the interface, you'll have to use a more powerful language.

-- Bill

On Sunday 02 March 2008, Luis A. Florit wrote:

* El 02/03/08 a las 15:25, Laxminarayan Kamath chamullaba:

I am not a GIMP developer, though I have been a spectator on this list for a while now.

I suggest that you specify exactly what you are trying, and what exactly you are looking for.

A detailed work-flow and a UI mock-up image would best describe what you want.

Specify the problem.. not the solution.

Sorry, I thought I was clear enough (did I specify the solution??) What I want to do is what is pretty standard in these cases:

My script-fu has a lot of options, and a check box to use default values of these options. I want these options to become grayed out when the check box is checked. Just that.

My other question was if it is possible to add text to a script-fu option window that is not related to an option of the script.

But I do not know if these are possible in script-fu, and I didn't find a complete enough reference for script-fu.

Thanks again,

L.

Hi there,

At first, I have to? say to you it is likely these chanegs are not going to be made.

The auto-interface build up in script-fu, perl-fu and python-fu is a convenience, and presented "as is". More sofisticated plug-ins should use GTK+ to draw their own interfaces . Unfortunatelly this is no option when you are using Scheme (script-fu).

If you do your work in python, however, you have, in the opinos of many people, and in my strong opinion, an easier to work langauge than Scheme, and will gain the flexibility to build your custom interface as you please. (And still, won't miss any flexibilit otherwise avaliable only to plug-ins written in C). Ah, there are also Ruby bindings, should you prefer Ruby than Python.

And finally, so that you don't think you are alone in this desire for greater control on the authomatic interfaces, I have thoguth about that as well, and it is possible that something more or less like what you are asking to be implemented for Python plug-ins.

Regards,

js ->

Luis A. Florit wrote:

I want to do these on the plugin option window:

1) Gray-out some options according to checkboxes; 2) Add arbitrary text, horizontal lines, boxes, or something like that.

You can't do either of the above in Script-Fu. Adding new parameter types to allow adding extra text or horizontal lines is possible but is not currently on the ToDo list. Greying out other items based on selections being made is a feature that is unlikely to be seen in Script-Fu anytime in the near, or distant, future.

Luis A. Florit wrote:

But I do not know if these are possible in script-fu, and I didn't find a complete enough reference for script-fu.

There is some documentation about Script-Fu at http://www.gimp.org/docs/. I have been putting together my own set of documentation for Script-Fu which you can find at: http://www.ve3syb.ca/wiki/doku.php?id=software:sf:start

Amongst the things you will find there are a list of the items you can use in the register block.

Hi,

On Sun, 2008-03-02 at 13:34 -0500, Kevin Cozens wrote:

You can't do either of the above in Script-Fu. Adding new parameter types to allow adding extra text or horizontal lines is possible but is not currently on the ToDo list.

What about the possibility to add an example image as proposed in bug #520066 ?

Sven

Sven Neumann wrote:

What about the possibility to add an example image as proposed in bug #520066 ?

It would be a useful feature. Again, it isn't on my ToDo list for Script-Fu. This feature would be of enough general use that it should be available to all scripting systems.

It would need to be decided how to implement the feature. How would one tell GIMP that a preview for a script is available (and what the file name is called)? Where would the preview images be stored?

Hi,

On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 17:16 -0500, Kevin Cozens wrote:

It would be a useful feature. Again, it isn't on my ToDo list for Script-Fu. This feature would be of enough general use that it should be available to all scripting systems.

I don't see this as a feature that the GIMP core would implement. It is up to the scripting language(s) to do that.

It would need to be decided how to implement the feature. How would one tell GIMP that a preview for a script is available (and what the file name is called)? Where would the preview images be stored?

Just add a function like script-fu-example-image-register that associates an image filename with the procedure. The images could live in the scripts folder, right next to the script.

Sven

Sven Neumann wrote:

On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 17:16 -0500, Kevin Cozens wrote:

This feature would be of enough general use that it should be available to all scripting systems.

I don't see this as a feature that the GIMP core would implement. It is up to the scripting language(s) to do that.

I don't know if you would consider a library as being part of the GIMP core. This feature could be implemented in a new GIMP library or as part of libgimpui.

An existing GSoC 2008 project idea is to provide a unified UI for scripting. If a unified UI is considered a desirable feature, why would you say that each language binding should provide its own method of registering/providing preview images?

Just add a function like script-fu-example-image-register that associates an image filename with the procedure. The images could live in the scripts folder, right next to the script.

The one question I forgot to ask is how would a person get to see these preview images? Using an image preview browser? A "show preview" button (or menu item) in the scripts UI window? Some other mechanism (yet to be decided)?

Hi,

On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 14:29 -0500, Kevin Cozens wrote:

I don't know if you would consider a library as being part of the GIMP core. This feature could be implemented in a new GIMP library or as part of libgimpui.

How so? This is really something that can be implemented in about ten lines of code. Most of this code will be Script-Fu specific. So I don't see how this could be part of any GIMP library.

The one question I forgot to ask is how would a person get to see these preview images? Using an image preview browser? A "show preview" button (or menu item) in the scripts UI window? Some other mechanism (yet to be decided)?

That is indeed the more difficult question here. Besides the question whether such static example images would be useful at all. The easiest solution is probably to put it inside the scripts UI window similar to how plug-ins place their previews.

Sven

Sven Neumann wrote:

On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 14:29 -0500, Kevin Cozens wrote:

The one question I forgot to ask is how would a person get to see these preview images? Using an image preview browser? A "show preview" button (or menu item) in the scripts UI window? Some other mechanism (yet to be decided)?

That is indeed the more difficult question here. Besides the question whether such static example images would be useful at all. The easiest solution is probably to put it inside the scripts UI window similar to how plug-ins place their previews.

As far as I understand the point is to allow users to get an overview of what effect the different filters will have on the image so then putting this static preview in the scripts UI window where the dynamic previews are doesn't make any sense. Or did I misunderstand you?

- Martin