On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 00:42 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > One problem with this approach is that unlike the original code > and vektor's, mine does not cache all glyph extents ever queried. > I would like to see that as a plus, that the cache does not grow > unbounded. On the other hand, cairo and FreeType have their own > caches, so we are just adding a small L1 cache on top of them. > Very reasonable IMHO. > > What do people think? As for speed, I did a measurement, it > performed almost like vektor's. Although I expect it to be a bit > slower, since the cache size is 256, not 1024. Would be nice if > somebody else benchmarks too. >
Generally (without looking at the patch), your approach sounds very reasonable to me. Did you see any size differences between the original (unbounded) caching and your cache ? Ie does limiting the cache size reduce the memory consumption ? Matthias _______________________________________________ Performance-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/performance-list
