Home > Archive > Tcl > September 2006 > Re: is tcl/tk dying out?! - TclMagick
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: is tcl/tk dying out?! - TclMagick
|
|
| David N. Welton 2006-09-26, 4:10 am |
| Stephan Kuhagen wrote:
>
> Oops... ;-) If I look on the website (sourceforge), I find no last update
> line, but only the date 2004. That make me think, that there is not much
> development in the last two years. To get it, you either have to check it
> out from the repository and compile it (which is no choice for many people)
> or go to the download section and find one binary version for Windows and
> some older binaries for Linux, but no installers and no recent versions.
> This simply leaves the impression, that it is not a really living and
> maintained project.
Let's put it this way, like many things, it's alive, it works, but it's
dormant.
> Another thing, but that is a design decision, is that the API of TclMagick
> reflects the API of ImageMagick very closely. This makes it very powerful
> on the one hand, but OTOH very complex. I miss a simple interface, some
> kind of scripting equivalent of a very simple drawing program.
Rolf's the guy who actually did the lion's share of the work and wrote
all that code, so it was his decision. I think it's the right one,
though, because it was already a huge task to get all that API
translated into Tcl via C. If people want something on top of it, the
effort will have to come from someone else, unfortunately. I think it
would be sensible and not too hard, though.
> But what is the biggest problem is something, that has not to do with
> TclMagick. As I said, TclMagick was a good start, but it is not part of Tcl
> as Tk is. If you install simply Tcl, you do not have anything to do simple
> image manipulation.
To be honest, I don't think TclMagick is the best candidate for a
batteries included distribution, as it's not really that small once you
include IM or GraphicsMagick along with it (probably around 4 megs total).
--
David N. Welton
- http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Linux, Open Source Consulting
- http://www.dedasys.com/
| |
| Stephan Kuhagen 2006-09-26, 4:10 am |
| David N. Welton wrote:
>
> Let's put it this way, like many things, it's alive, it works, but it's
> dormant.
I did not mean to say, that it is dead. As I stated before, I think, it is a
good starting point. To be honest, I was amazed when I found it.
> To be honest, I don't think TclMagick is the best candidate for a
> batteries included distribution, as it's not really that small once you
> include IM or GraphicsMagick along with it (probably around 4 megs total).
I agree. For what I mean what should be part of Tcl is a very small basic
image manipulation and drawing part in the core. This can then easily
extended at scripting level in the standard library.
But nevertheless, TclMagick is a  extension. So do not think, that I do
not like it!
Regards
Stephan
|
|
|
|
|