![]() |
Gimp.ParamSpec.int() default value triggers “invalid or out of range” warning - Printable Version +- Gimp-Forum.net (https://www.gimp-forum.net) +-- Forum: GIMP (https://www.gimp-forum.net/Forum-GIMP) +--- Forum: Extending the GIMP (https://www.gimp-forum.net/Forum-Extending-the-GIMP) +--- Thread: Gimp.ParamSpec.int() default value triggers “invalid or out of range” warning (/Thread-Gimp-ParamSpec-int-default-value-triggers-%E2%80%9Cinvalid-or-out-of-range%E2%80%9D-warning) |
Gimp.ParamSpec.int() default value triggers “invalid or out of range” warning - owierda - 07-07-2025 Hi folks — I'm working on a plugin for GIMP 3.0 and running into a strange behavior with Gimp.ParamSpec.int. When I define a property like seed with: python proc.add_argument( Gimp.ParamSpec.int( "seed", "Seed", "Seed value", 0, # min 9999, # max 9999, # default Gimp.ParamFlags.READWRITE ) ) I get this warning at plugin registration: Warning: value "9999" of type 'gint' is invalid or out of range for property 'seed' of type 'gint' min <= max => default The default is clearly within the defined min/max bounds, and all three values (min, max, default) are legitimate. Strangely, the only setup that suppresses this warning is when all three values are **exactly the same** (we call it the triple x same bug), like: python 0, 0, 0 or 1024, 1024, 1024 Even common combinations like: python 0, 9999, 0 512, 2048, 1024 or: python 0, 9999, 5000 cause the warning to appear and as a result, the plug-in is not registered. I’ve searched around but haven’t found an explanation. Is this a known quirk in GIMP’s plugin API? Are there hidden constraints on gint properties that aren’t documented? Any ideas or workarounds would be appreciated! Thanks ? Olaf RE: Gimp.ParamSpec.int() default value triggers “invalid or out of range” warning - Ofnuts - 07-07-2025 Use add_int_argument() instead (in fact I don' t see any documented add_argument() method). RE: Gimp.ParamSpec.int() default value triggers “invalid or out of range” warning - owierda - 07-07-2025 (07-07-2025, 05:15 PM)Ofnuts Wrote: Use add_int_argument() instead (in fact I don' t see any documented add_argument() method). Hi, my bad, I am using add_int_argument() (it was late) Thanks for your time Olaf PS I'll update my post |