[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?
From: |
Keith OHara |
Subject: |
Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ? |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:24:47 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Opera Mail/12.16 (Win32) |
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 23:07:19 -0800, Keith OHara <address@hidden> wrote:
I am happy to say that I was wrong here.
Open_type_font:: and Pango_font::name_to_index() each call FT_Get_Name_Index().
Inserting print statements to trace those calls I find that FT_Get_Name_Index
is called:
7 times for each character in a Tempo
I had failed to notice how the 'pure' calls to vertical-skylines are
implemented.
Most properties, if directed to a callback function, have result of the
callback function replace the pointer to that function. This way the function
does its job just once.
Sizes of spanners, that do depend on layout but are needed to evaluate potential
layouts, are cached in Spanner::get_cached_pure_property() for each combination of
'start' & 'end' columns that define the line of music on which they might
appear.
If the property-lookup is 'pure' (tentative) then usually callback functions
are not called.
Previously, functions providing stencils of objects whose shape does not depend
on page-layout were on a pure-print-callback list, so their shapes could be
used during layout decisions.
At the moment, there is an unpure-pure-container wrapper around the (expensive)
function that builds skylines for text. For some reason this allows repeated
function calls to re-compute the property, even when the 'pure' and 'unpure'
versions are the same.
Somewhere there should be a way to mark the skylines as "independent of layout"
and the method should be used for vertical-skylines of text.
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, (continued)
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Mike Solomon, 2013/12/14
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/12/13
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, David Kastrup, 2013/12/13
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/12/13
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Keith OHara, 2013/12/13
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/12/13
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?,
Keith OHara <=
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Francisco Vila, 2013/12/11
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, David Kastrup, 2013/12/10
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Mike Solomon, 2013/12/10
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, David Kastrup, 2013/12/10
- Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Mike Solomon, 2013/12/10
Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?, Trevor Daniels, 2013/12/10