Hi again, I did not find my "gut feeling" mail, so I restate some of this to be sure it is in the discussion.
> I would have expected the extractor to not just deal with one image > at a time... Yes. This would be good. > Why not alter it to take any number of images as command line > parameters, or no parameter to read an image from stdin (and in that > case pipe the result to stdout)? I think this is not good, as we want to monitor progress. KDE - for example - monitors the output of gift-add-collection.pl in order to drive a progress bar when indexing. The "pipe in file names and destinations, receive feedback via pipe out"-approach would fit in better with that. > If gift-extract-features would take any number of images parameters > on the command line, the perl hack could send it batches of N images > to deal with. Yes, if N is sufficiently small, this could be a way to do things. However, I think the command line would be pretty wieldy, so why not use a pipe anyways? > This COULD give further performance improvements as well. > After all, if memory allocation is in fact such a hog that replacing > a call to calloc with a fixed array makes a difference, then you > could surely save a lot more by just allocating that memory (with > calloc) once, and just clear it (memset with zero) before handling > each image, and realloc it whenever a larger image comes along. > No (compile time) fixed sizes would be needed. > (I'm assuming the thing isn't threaded, and that it doesn't leak > memory or other resources...) It surely will improve things. A lot. Cheers, Wolfgang -- Dr. Wolfgang Müller LS Medieninformatik Universität Bamberg Check out the SIG MM web site http://www.sigmm.org _______________________________________________ help-GIFT mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gift
