Hi Kurt,

I was thinking about sub-classing Fl_Group or Fl_Scroll and implement a clear 
method of my own, but variables being private and Albrecht strongly suggesting 
NOT to do this make me reluctant to do it. Also, I would probably just 
reintroduce the bugs present in the previous FLTK versions in my own clear 
method.

/Andreas


> On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 06:30:08AM -0800, Andreas Ekstrand wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We use an Fl_Scroll with a large number of buttons to accomplish a fancy 
> > tree-view in our application. After an update to the latest FLTK 1.3, we 
> > discovered a major fall in performance when clearing the scroll in order to 
> > re-calculate the graph represented in the Fl_Scroll.
> >
> > We use Fl_Group::clear explicitly, I think Fl_Scroll::clear was even 
> > slower. The problem is that in a graph with e.g. 8000 children on one 
> > level, the new implementation of Fl_Group::clear which I think was 
> > introduced January 8, 2009, is way to slow for us, removing each child 
> > separately. The old implementation where the complete array was cleared at 
> > once was much faster.
> >
> > Perhaps you could re-introduce the old implementation in a separate method 
> > or with a boolean parameter to the clear method? We are looking for a quick 
> > solution here, since we want to use the latest FLTK 1.3 with our next patch 
> > release of our software.
> Would subclassing Fl_Group or Fl_Scroll suit your needs?
> Kurt
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andreas Ekstrand
> > Remograph
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > fltk-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
>

_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to