> manolo gouy wrote: > > >> Might be worth a shot - though perhaps fl_measure() is what you want in > >> this case? > >> > > > > Interesting idea. However, this would increase the size of the pile > > because we would have to memorize dx and dy in addition to w and h > > for each pre-computed texture. So I think we can stick with > > fl_measure. > > OK. You're closer to this than anyone so you know what is best. > I had assumed that the size of the texture bitmap would dominate, so > that adding the 2 extra ints for dx,dy would be small in comparison with > the savings in bitmap storage. > -- > Ian >
You're right, I was stupid: two ints are less than several bytes. I tried it. It doesn't work well because writing a string larger than the bitmap to a bitmap context gives strange results. _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
