Hi Sven, I am confused. What technical reason exists to assume gegl cannot be as fast as vips? Is it memory usage? Extra necessary calculations? Some way in which parallelism is not as possible?
-- Daniel On Jan 28, 2016 12:58 PM, "Sven Claussner" <scl.gp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > the developers of VIPS/libvips, a batch image-processing library, > have a performance and memory usage comparison on their website, > including a GEGL test. [1] > Some days ago I told John Cupitt, the maintainer there, some issues > with the reported GEGL tests. > In his answer to me John points out that GEGL is a bit odd in this > comparison, because it is the only interactive image processing library > there. He therefore suggests to remove GEGL from this list. > > What do you GEGL developers think - does anybody need these results so > GEGL should reside in this comparison or would it be OK, if John > removed it from the list? > > Greetings > > Sven > > [1] > http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/index.php?title=Speed_and_Memory_Use > > > _______________________________________________ > gegl-developer-list mailing list > List address: gegl-developer-list@gnome.org > List membership: > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer-list > >
_______________________________________________ gegl-developer-list mailing list List address: gegl-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer-list
