Original Message
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Performance improvement in property consumption.]
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 18:30:39 +1000
From: Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Finn Bock wrote:
[Peter]
Alt-design just
Peter B. West wrote:
Finn Bock wrote:
[Peter]
Alt-design just uses a sparse array, constructed at END_ELEMENT. Space
savings are progressively realized as the depth of the FO Tree reduces.
Maximum consumption occurs at the points of greatest depth of the
tree, minima at the end of each
[Peter]
Alt-design just uses a sparse array, constructed at END_ELEMENT. Space
savings are progressively realized as the depth of the FO Tree reduces.
Maximum consumption occurs at the points of greatest depth of the
tree, minima at the end of each page-sequence.
[me]
IIRC your sparse array does
Why is it more efficient (I know it is, given your
metrics, but want to know why)--aren't you just moving
the values already stored in the PropertyList into
separate fields in the FO objects? Yes, you're
releasing the PropertyList's memory, but the elements
that the PropertyList previously stored
On Oct 15, 2004, at 12:05 AM, Finn Bock wrote:
snip
In the rest of the elements, the set of fields matches the spec. The
only exception is a bug where the some of the inline LayoutManagers
uses vertical-align which is a shorthand. The layoutmanagers should
instead use the properties that the
Clay Leeds wrote:
snip/
When I look at the FOP Compliance page, I see a couple of items which
are implemented (I assume this page is in reference to the
0_20_2-maintain CVS branch--I am I correct in this assumption?).
Hi Clay - yes compliance page does refer to 0.20.5 functionality.
snip/
Chris
[Clay]
Which of the alignment-* property is the one you're referring to that
has been implemented?
I was just looking at them from the point of view of the property
subsystem, where only baseline-shift has been implemented. I didn't
mean to imply that it actually work all the way through
On Oct 15, 2004, at 1:02 PM, Finn Bock wrote:
[Clay]
Which of the alignment-* property is the one you're referring to that
has been implemented?
I was just looking at them from the point of view of the property
subsystem, where only baseline-shift has been implemented. I didn't
mean to imply
Don't mind the delay. Too many email addresses in a futile attempt to
keep one spam-clean. Apologies to Christian.
Original Message
Subject: Re: Performance improvement in property consumption.
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:29:24 +1000
From: Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
