Re: what patches are you interested in?

Leonard -

> What do you see as the advantage for this - or just portability?

float operations are 20%-50% faster than double on ARM cpus (which is where I 
am running). I don't think I need the added precision of double, so if there 
were a config option today to choose the type, I would try float.
gm has all the type stuff for Quantum, but not for FP. I think the GM sources 
would be of higher value if they had such a typedef/define.

>          I had a LOT of discussions with Cristy back in the IM days about
> doing this, when I was using IM to render SVG & PDF documents, and his
> argument at the time was that it would add another set of APIs that only a
> limited set of people would use.   Also, at that time, the overhead of the
> strings was actually less in some cases than the rendering of AA'd vector
> objects...
>
>          There is also the issue about management of graphics states and
> clipping paths which is currently handled by the "wrappers" around the core
> drawing ops.

I don't want to force my stuff onto anybody. For myself, I will simply go 
ahead and make whatever change I find appropriate.
As for the GM community effort, I would like to understand what patches the 
maintainers are interested in, so that I don't waste my time. In parallel, I 
will switch to CVS to arch hoping that arch will help me to have two 
different source trees and propagate changes between them.
Maintainers, please let me know ;-)))

Wolfgang

On Thursday 05 February 2004 10:06 pm, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> At 12:25 PM 2/5/2004, Wolfgang Spraul wrote:
> >Use the preprocessor (#define) or compiler (typedef) to make it possible
> > to switch the C type used for floating point variables. I'm thinking
> > about a patch that would allow either double or float.
>
>          What do you see as the advantage for this - or just portability?
>
> >Add Drawxx() functions that render immediately without going thru the mvg
> >string.
>
>          I had a LOT of discussions with Cristy back in the IM days about
> doing this, when I was using IM to render SVG & PDF documents, and his
> argument at the time was that it would add another set of APIs that only a
> limited set of people would use.   Also, at that time, the overhead of the
> strings was actually less in some cases than the rendering of AA'd vector
> objects...
>
>          There is also the issue about management of graphics states and
> clipping paths which is currently handled by the "wrappers" around the core
> drawing ops.
>
>          But I'm 110% in favor of this!
>
>
> Leonard
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
> Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
> See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
> http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
> _______________________________________________
> Graphicsmagick-core mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/graphicsmagick-core


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn