J.Pietschmann wrote:

> Victor Mote wrote:
> > I don't see why you
> > would suggest that my proposal would use more memory. I am quite sure it
> > would use less, but not enough to even mention.
> Well, your approach to "decoupling layout and rendering" seems
> to include building a full area tree, or something equivalent.
> FOP was implemented this way before 0.20.1. What you might see
> as "tight coupling" is the result of improving the situation.

I have been misunderstood somewhere. There may be times when building a full
area tree (and writing to disk if necessary) is appropriate, esp. if it were
going to be reused. That is a dead issue. If the area tree is only used
once, then PageSequence is the largest chunk that might need to be built,
and then only if patient processing is used. I do not intend to force anyone
to do anything different than is now done in terms of how memory is managed,
or even the general flow of the processing. What I am asking for is that
control of those decisions be made at a higher level, which keeps the code
modular and gives us more options. I don't want layout starting the process
of rendering a page, but rather to notify the control mechanism that a page
is ready, and letting the control mechanism decide whether to cache it,
render it, whether that should be done in a separate thread, etc. IOW the
performance "smarts" are in the high-level control objects.

I'm sorry if that was not clear before.

Victor Mote

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to