On 08/24/2010 04:20 AM, David Gowers wrote:
> I hope you're not associating the quite suboptimal way in which GIMP
> currently uses GEGL, with BABL's speed or lack of speed.
Just did a quick test:
1Mio random pixels passed to babl as one buffer (=one function call) vs.
passing the same buffer pixel by pixel (=1Mio calls) to the integer
babl still comes out 35x slower.
Gimp-developer mailing list