On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Larry Gritz l...@larrygritz.com wrote:
I dunno, I'm tempted to think that in exchange for that conceptual
cleanliness, you're paying with a second type to juggle and understand
when each is applicable.
Right. After looking back at the code, I think the way we
On Jun 26, 2012, at 12:32 PM, Brent Davis wrote:
As an aside, what do you think about TiledIterator instead of
UnorderedIterator as a more descriptive name?
I think that TiledIterator could imply that Iterator doesn't use tiles,
even though it does (when using the cache, anyway). So I
On Jun 26, 2012, at 2:24 PM, Chris Foster wrote:
Side note: If we have TiledIterator, should we make it part of the
interface that Iterator visits pixels in scanline order? If not, there
doesn't seem much merit in even having a distinction.
It does beg the question about whether, if
Side note: If we have TiledIterator, should we make it part of the
interface that Iterator visits pixels in scanline order? If not, there
doesn't seem much merit in even having a distinction.
Sorry about the late reply, I assumed this was more directed at the devs as
a group rather than at
I think it should be ok to have pos(). It doesn't need to know the full
history of iteration; if you ++ after a pos(), it just iterates as it would
have if it naturally reached that position.
Since different images will have different tile sizes -- but note that it was
always the case that
Hi Brent,
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:00 AM, Brent Davis btda...@coe.edu wrote:
Second, I added an UnorderedIterator.
Cool! I've thought this was a good idea for quite a while but was too
lazy/busy to implement it myself ;-)
The main differences between this and
the normal iterator are: (1)
I'm not sure I understand why there can't be a pos() for an UnorderedIterator.
Can you explain?
On Jun 15, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Brent Davis wrote:
Alright, I've got something working now; I'll try to walk through what
changes I've made to ImageBuf.
---
First, I carved out an IteratorBase
Hi, Brent. Dan Wexler is hitting a bit of a busy patch, so I'm going to be
pitching in a bit more with mentoring duties.
On Jun 4, 2012, at 6:09 PM, Brent Davis wrote:
Do you know how Boost's futures compare to C++11?
From what I understand, C++11's threads library is modeled directly
There is a copy_pixels in the ImageBuf (actually, I *just* renamed it to
get_pixels which seemed more in line with naming and doesn't conflict with
a slightly different copy_pixels from IB to IB).
Ah, I didn't notice that, I'll take a look.
Do you know how Boost's futures compare to C++11?
On May 23, 2012, at 12:36 PM, Brent Davis wrote:
Retile is getting called 8640 times (which happens to be ceil(1920/256)*1080)
with this image; optimally we would have to retile 40 times at this tile
size (ie, ceil(1920/256)*ceil(1080/256)). On large images this is compounded:
on my
10 matches
Mail list logo
