Hi; On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 10:31 +0100, Neil Roberts wrote: > Looking at the clutter_group_paint function, isn't it completely > unnecessary that we push and pop the matrix there? We don't change the > matrix at all in that function and each child actor will push and pop > the matrix itself before applying the transformation in > clutter_actor_paint. Getting rid of that would effectively double the > stack depth right? >
The fact that we push/pop in clutter_actor_paint itself likely means any actor implementation ever needs to push/pop ? The reason its there is probably more historical raisins, copy/pasted code and never hitting the stack limits (me personally anyway). == Matthew -- To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
