On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I actually came across this one by accident. I was playing with > qtperf4 [1] and was profiling the "QTextEdit - add text" since that > seems a bit slow and equally slow on raster and native. So, after > profiling it turns out that the vast majority of that benchmark is > spending it's time in qShapeItem which in turn ends up (after a bunch > of calls) in HB_GPOS_Apply_String and HB_GSUB_Apply_String. About > 4/5th of the benchmark time is spend there. > > So i was wondering if Qt was using the latest harfbuzz which > apparently isn't the case. It's not even visible which version Qt > ships by default, but it is visible that the current harfbuzz > development is a lot further [2]. > > Note: the above mentioned profiling was on Qt 4.8.3, not 5.0 beta, > > Cheers, > Mark > > [1] http://code.google.com/p/qtperf/ > [2] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/harfbuzz/
For reference, the 0.9.2 release https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-announce-list/2012-August/msg00024.html which also notes: "I can finally claim that new HarfBuzz is in par with or better than both Pango and old.HarfBuzz / Qt." _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
