From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Image transformations Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 13:57:16 +0300 Message-ID: <83ftocxwmr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <9A21DE14-BB5F-426E-BBB2-19C87930E733@gnu.org> <20190611200233.GA80199@breton.holly.idiocy.org> <83imta95z0.fsf@gnu.org> <20190612220746.GA89208@breton.holly.idiocy.org> <834l4u11dr.fsf@gnu.org> <20190613165804.GB11266@breton.holly.idiocy.org> <83d0jhz9za.fsf@gnu.org> <20190613192724.GA11945@breton.holly.idiocy.org> <83zhmlxo6d.fsf@gnu.org> <20190613222626.GA12971@breton.holly.idiocy.org> <83o930y7cl.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="159371"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 14 12:58:37 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hbjum-000fHN-Df for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 12:58:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50158 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hbjul-0005d6-Cf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 06:58:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60466) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hbjtW-0005YS-Fu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 06:57:19 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:59037) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hbjtW-00018B-Bb; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 06:57:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4509 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hbjtT-0005Kz-0L; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 06:57:16 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Fri, 14 Jun 2019 05:57:21 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:237588 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 05:57:21 -0400 > > > I think this would be a wasted effort. There's no need to make all > > the implementations use the same matrix, unless they all assign the > > same semantics to the matrix -- which doesn't appear to be the case, > > at least not as far as this discussion shows. > > There's one case where this would make sense: if we decide to let Elisp > provide such a matrix. Why would providing a matrix interface be a good idea? I think an interface based on attributes (:crop, :rotation, etc.) is much cleaner and easier to use. We can always add more attributes (like :shear) if we want. What am I missing?