I'm sorry for the long delay here, I got sidetracked for quite a while trying
to unravel a site-specific problem -- in the process of trying to benchmark
different OpenEXR versions, I found out that I was getting vastly different
speeds even on the same exr version depending on whether I built
Replies inline...
On 16 January 2016 at 07:52, Larry Gritz wrote:
> I'm sorry for the long delay here, I got sidetracked for quite a while
> trying to unravel a site-specific problem -- in the process of trying to
> benchmark different OpenEXR versions, I found out that I
On 16/01/2016 05:35, Karl Rasche wrote:
I found out that I was getting vastly different speeds even on the same
exr version depending on whether I built libIlmImf myself or used the
system libraries. It seems to have boiled down to compiler releases (gcc
4.4 vs gcc 4.8 vs clang -- the latter
Sent on the go...
> On 15 Jan 2016, at 21:09, Peter Pearson wrote:
>
> Replies inline...
>
>> On
>
> Also, reading and writing of values in OpenEXR goes through ImfXdr.h's
> conversion routines doing bitshifting for I assume endianness conversion? - I
> guess the
> > Also, reading and writing of values in OpenEXR goes through ImfXdr.h's
> conversion routines doing bitshifting for I assume endianness conversion? -
> I guess the x86 port for OpenEXR had to convert this, whereas the SGI
> versions didn't, and we're stuck with it now?
>
> There are certainly