convolution vs. transform

Jaymz Julian <jaymz-y6qSm6YX8/[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.freedesktop.xserver
Message-ID <[email protected]>
a couple of questions to which i currently lack the answers relating to 
convolutions.

a) Which would be considered the correct order to do things in, 
convole -> transform -> composite, or transform -> convole -> composite?

(I suspect that the latter is the more attractive option, although under the
current implentation of composite+transform, the former is easier to 
implement.  I did have the idea that maybe we should support both as picture
properties (neither is implemented right now, only matrix convolutions as a 
standalone op are), but that just seems like overkill.  One point to note, 
i guess, is that many, many video cards can accelerate a composite+transform
in one op if the convolution comes first, but it's require 2 graphics card ops
if the convolution has to happen in the middle).

b) which is considered a better interface - one call per differnet type of 
convolution (XRenderMatrixConvolution, XRenderGaussianBlur, etc), or just a 
single call with an op parameter? (I'm leaning towards the second of these 
right now, but that's mostly because that's path of least resistance - 
juggling Render, XRender, and xserver is annoying :-p).

	-- jj

-- 
Jaymz Julian aka A Life in Hell / Warriors of the Wasteland / Unreal
Coder, Visionary, Fat Ass.
overdrive, overscan, over awed, over it.
We're heading for a mad-man situation.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.