As someone new to the gegl development list and seeing the performance numbers in that benchmark, I propose adding a asterisk * by each gegl number would help the reader understand that something is different with this library. Then add the corresponding asterisk down by the statement, "GEGL is not really designed for batch-style processing -- it targets interactive applications, like paint programs." Since gegl is the only interactive library in the list the asterisk works well enough and separating it out to a different table is not necessary.
Best regards, -Adam Bavier On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Sven Claussner <scl.gp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > the developers of VIPS/libvips, a batch image-processing library, > have a performance and memory usage comparison on their website, > including a GEGL test. [1] > Some days ago I told John Cupitt, the maintainer there, some issues > with the reported GEGL tests. > In his answer to me John points out that GEGL is a bit odd in this > comparison, because it is the only interactive image processing library > there. He therefore suggests to remove GEGL from this list. > > What do you GEGL developers think - does anybody need these results so > GEGL should reside in this comparison or would it be OK, if John > removed it from the list? > > Greetings > > Sven > > [1] > http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/index.php?title=Speed_and_Memory_Use > > > _______________________________________________ > gegl-developer-list mailing list > List address: gegl-developer-list@gnome.org > List membership: > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer-list > >
_______________________________________________ gegl-developer-list mailing list List address: gegl-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer-list
