> > > > > > generate thumbs vaguely efficiently withotu eating up all ram and generating > > billions of processes :) > > Hm. Is this the best workaround? Isn't the system only creating one > thumb for each fork? Isn't it better to queue up several images and do > them all in one fork? >
I first had it running with multiple forks, which proved too heavy, so you switched it to one fork and multiple thumbs. That works well, but doesnt look good. The problem is that either all of your thumbs will suddenly appear, or the thumbs will appear N by N depending on how many you queue. I think this is the best approach because it is the most interactive, showing the thumbs as they come in, letting the user feel like the work is being done and nothing is hanging or keeping him from seeing stuff. Although the multiple forks are more work, in this case we have to sacrifice extreme effeciency for what looks and feels better to the end user. Besides, the overhead isnt really that much, its very little actually, try it (= -- Hisham Mardam Bey MSc (Computer Science) http://hisham.cc/ +9613609386 Codito Ergo Sum (I Code Therefore I Am) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
