Re: [PATCH] Minor fixes in the new downscaling code.

On 04.02.2014 22:48, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
> This adresses issues brought up on the mailing list. If we use
> a non-impulse samping kernel, there is no need to use anything
> more sophisticated than box reconstruction. Similarly, using
> a non-box reconstruction kernel is OK with impulse sampling.
> 
> Also addressed is PIXMAN_FILTER_BEST, which previously fell through
> to the default case.
> ---
>  src/cairo-image-source.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/cairo-image-source.c b/src/cairo-image-source.c
> index 661bc10..254d6ba 100644
> --- a/src/cairo-image-source.c
> +++ b/src/cairo-image-source.c
> @@ -590,6 +590,7 @@ _pixman_image_set_properties (pixman_image_t *pixman_image,
>          pixman_filter = PIXMAN_FILTER_BEST;
>          pixman_kernel_sample = PIXMAN_KERNEL_LANCZOS3;
>          pixman_kernel_reconstruct = PIXMAN_KERNEL_LANCZOS3;
> +        break;
>      case CAIRO_FILTER_GAUSSIAN:
>          /* XXX: The GAUSSIAN value has no implementation in cairo
>           * whatsoever, so it was really a mistake to have it in the
[...]

Does anyone know why the test suite didn't catch this?

I don't have the time to look closely at this right now, but I would expect that
we either have some wrong reference images and tests now start to fail or that
the scaling tests don't cover enough cases...

Uli
-- 
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
 people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."
-- 
cairo mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cairographics.org/mailman/listinfo/cairo