My vote would be to make it configurable between "direct" and "buffered" rendering. The default should probably be consistent with the original behavior (ie, buffered) for backward compatibility. Our applications don't use zooming, and fidelity is important to us, so we would typically use "direct".
All of that said... I don't recall if fidelity was the only issue that direct rendering solved. I'll discuss with my colleagues to see if any of them have a better memory. Chris On Mar 5, 3:36 pm, piccol...@googlecode.com wrote: > Comment #5 on issue 173 by atdi...@gmail.com: Slow repaint of PSwing > components when zooming (from 1.2 to > 1.3)http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=173 > > Before Issue 82, PSwing would render to a buffer and then render that > buffer to the Graphics2D. The result would be that the buffer would undergo > the applied transforms. > > Issue 82 changed this so that the Swing component rendered directly to the > (transformed) Graphics2D. It turns out the painting a JComponent with > transform applied is much more expensive than painting the buffer. > > Of course you lose fidelity when translating the buffered version (see > picture.) > > Should we restore the buffered approach? Should we make this configurable? > > Attachments: > 2v3.jpg 30.6 KB -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en