From: Noah Roberts (roberts.noah_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-21 18:18:06
John Femiani wrote:
>
> I've been happily using gil for a while, and it suits my needs well, but
> I think your assessment is correct in your case. It does not have not
> the best image io library (they consider io an optional extension
> actually), and it does not help with image display at all. It would be
> nice if there was a boost graphics library..., but I guess that is to
> tricky to get right.
Thanks. Yeah, nothing against GIL, I'm sure it does what it was
designed for well.