I agree the software fallback should just be the generic polygon fill. A bit warped but if ..
If you have hardware accel triangle then poly uses that If not you do scanline and the triangle fallback just calls the poly fill. As a note for cairo a optimized case of filling trapezoids would really help. Something like http://www.cs.unc.edu/~dm/CODE/GEM/chapter.html Anyway to note your dealing with traps would be cool. I've not looked at your algo but if you do poly->traps ---? triangle/scanline and we have a api for trapezoids it would work very well with 2D front ends. Fast trapezoid drawing is very very useful as a backend for most 2D engines. On 9/13/06, Ville Syrjälä <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 07:41:30AM -0400, Matt Lavin wrote: > > That's an interesting question with respect to my desired changes. Last > > night I thought of a change I could make so that the polygon is rendered > > with triangles instead of scanlines. Would it be better to render with > > fillTriangle calls because it is usually hardware accelerated? > > Yes, it should be faster. However if FillTriangle isn't hw accelerated > then it would probably be faster to use scanlines (FillTriangle sw > fallback uses scanlines anyway). > > -- > Ville Syrjälä > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/ > _______________________________________________ directfb-dev mailing list directfb-dev@directfb.org http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev
