On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 09:18:27AM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote: > > 1. How does it affect performance? Have you tried the Benchmark() > action?
I didn't try Benchmark(), but there was no noticable effect on performance. Regular polygon display is still a much bigger problem. In fact, now that I know more about the HID, I'm confused as to why the "regular" polygons aren't drawn using the mask technology -- it would eliminate calls to the polygon dicer, which are the bulk of the problem. (I should also note that I'm using a remote X display over 100bT ethernet, so I'd guess anyone with a local display is going to see vastly better performance than I am, anyway). > 2. Can it be applied to all the layers, ala eagle style display? It > would be nice to be able to see behind pads and traces. There are two ways to approach that: One is to change all the drawing to use the mask layer (as I did to the rats). The drawing is unchanged, but the final masked-copy (now masked and alpha-blended composite) gives you transparency. The other alternative is to keep drawing into the main_pixmap (via the Xrender wrapper main_picture) using things like XRenderCompositeTriangles or XRenderCompositeTriFan, which can draw with alpha blending directly. (to try this, all you have to do is look at DrawRats from the patch and add those calls around anything else that you want to draw at 50%, I assume we'd extend the HID to vary the 50% part) I don't know which is going to have better performance, but I would guess that the mask version we have now is more likely to be accelerated. (also note that this is all in the draw path -- the expose path is still just a copy from a backing pixmap) -- Ben Jackson AD7GD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.ben.com/ _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
