On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Cedric BAIL<cedric.b...@free.fr> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Gustavo Sverzut > Barbieri<barbi...@profusion.mobi> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Enlightenment >> SVN<no-re...@enlightenment.org> wrote: >>> Log: >>> * edje: Reduce sizeof (Edje_Calc_Params). >>> >>> Note: It doesn't really impact edje memory foot print yet. But in >>> the plan to do a computation cache inside edje, this structure >>> will be used a lot (I am planning to do this feature at some point, >>> but no ETA yet, and be reassured it will be optionnal so we can >>> choose between CPU load or memory load). >>> >>> Note: As I was looking for similar area of improvements, >>> Edje_Part_Description could really use an union to reduce it's size, >>> but as we load this structure directly from an Eet file, we need >>> union in Eet first. And this should be part of a comming Edje file >>> format break. >> >> Better than union is to have the single part in one structure and >> specific bits in their own structure. Depending on how we do the Eet + >> union support, we may think on how to do it to cover this case as >> well. >> >> I'd say instead of allocate memory and fill it, one could give a >> "type" value to user callback and then it would receive the correct >> Eet_Data_Descriptor for that subtype. So union would return the data >> descriptor with the same struct size for all types, while dynamic >> would check (switch/case) which one to use, and return the fields >> properly. >> >> This is likely to reduce memory consumption a lot because we often >> have LOTS of rectangle that have almost no field, while we have very >> few TEXT/TEXTBLOCK/GRADIENT that consume most memory. > > Hum, that's another possibility, this is almost like implementing some > object "inheritence" support in eet. This could be much more efficient > than using union, but only if type can't change, or you could be > forced to reallocate another structure. But this seems more usefull > than union for Edje. Will put this somewhere in the TODO :-) > >> BTW, something that could improve memory there is using mempool. > > I don't really see how, what do you want to put inside this mempool > (one per type of edje object ?) ?
Edje_Part_Description is fixed size, would match perfectly fixed size mempool allocators. -- Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri http://profusion.mobi embedded systems -------------------------------------- MSN: barbi...@gmail.com Skype: gsbarbieri Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
