I'm not sure what you mean by "the layout tests don't cover fonts, rendering". While it is true that those tests do not cover rendering, it does include use of fonts.
Could you send me the "large latin only document" in FO form (preferably compressed if large), so I may test it? G. On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 7:51 AM, mehdi houshmand <med1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Glenn, > > We took a look at the complex scripts support, and a big chunk of the > code-base is in the fonts, and the layout tests don't cover fonts, > rendering etc. What are you finding for end-to-end performance? We > created a large latin only document and found about 50% increase in > time. > > Mehdi > > On 19 July 2011 14:36, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > > Taking the average of the best 3 out of 5 runs for a couple of the junit > > tests, I get the following: > > TRUNK CMPLX DIFF% > > junit-basic 4.87s 4.92s 1.01% > > junit-layout-standard 36.34s 36.72s 1.04% > > In the case of junit-layout-standard, there are 25 more tests run in the > > Complex Script branch. > > So, I'd say that there is about a 1% decrease in speed performance based > on > > this data. > > I doubt if users will even notice this, so this would argue for enabling > by > > default. > > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:08 AM, Pascal Sancho <pascal.san...@takoma.fr> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Glenn, > >> > >> IMHO, the default setting should depend on how much it affects the > >> performances. > >> Can you give an approximative impact? > >> > >> > >> Le 19/07/2011 03:40, Glenn Adams a écrit : > >> > I'm adding a feature to allow enable/disable of complex script > features > >> > (bidi, complex char to glyph mapping) at runtime, using either (or > both) > >> > command line option and config file element; the question I have is > >> > whether to enable or disable by default? > >> > > >> > If enabled by default, those who don't use complex scripts or don't > want > >> > advanced typography features in non-complex scripts will incur a minor > >> > performance penalty. > >> > > >> > If disabled by default, then those users who use complex scripts or > want > >> > advanced typography features in non-complex scripts will need to do > >> > something special to enable this support. > >> > > >> > What does the group think? I don't have a strong preference either > way. > >> > > >> > G. > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> Pascal > > > > >
