Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-14 Thread Richmond via use-livecode

Most probably :)

On 13/02/17 23:37, Stephen Barncard via use-livecode wrote:

The blind leading the blind?

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:


Over here, in Bulgaria, they expect kids to have got to grips with
Calculus to start studying programming!




--
Stephen Barncard - Sebastopol Ca. USA -
mixstream.org
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-13 Thread Stephen Barncard via use-livecode
The blind leading the blind?

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Over here, in Bulgaria, they expect kids to have got to grips with
> Calculus to start studying programming!




--
Stephen Barncard - Sebastopol Ca. USA -
mixstream.org
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-13 Thread Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode

Logic, branching, sets = Boolean logic.

Over here, in Bulgaria, they expect kids to have got to grips with 
Calculus to start studying programming!


Richmond.

On 2/13/17 10:07 pm, Stephen Barncard via use-livecode wrote:

Yes!  Logic - YES.   Concept of Sets - Yes.   Higher math... no


On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:


Something that never stops annoying me is the requirement for students who
want to study programming
to be good at Mathematics.

Richmond.




--
Stephen Barncard - Sebastopol Ca. USA -
mixstream.org
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-13 Thread Stephen Barncard via use-livecode
Yes!  Logic - YES.   Concept of Sets - Yes.   Higher math... no


On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Something that never stops annoying me is the requirement for students who
> want to study programming
> to be good at Mathematics.
>
> Richmond.
>



--
Stephen Barncard - Sebastopol Ca. USA -
mixstream.org
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-13 Thread Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode
Something that never stops annoying me is the requirement for students 
who want to study programming

to be good at Mathematics.

Richmond.

On 2/13/17 9:45 pm, hh via use-livecode wrote:

Bob S. wrote:
I failed 6th grade math and then went on to ace algebra and geometry.
Everyone can thank their lucky stars I didn't go in for Rocket Science!

Documented in a letter:
"... Do not worry about your difficulties in Mathematics. I can assure
you mine are still greater.
Best regards Professor Albert Einstein."

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-13 Thread hh via use-livecode
> Bob S. wrote:
> I failed 6th grade math and then went on to ace algebra and geometry.
> Everyone can thank their lucky stars I didn't go in for Rocket Science! 

Documented in a letter:
"... Do not worry about your difficulties in Mathematics. I can assure
you mine are still greater.
Best regards Professor Albert Einstein."

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-13 Thread Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
I failed 6th grade math and then went on to ace algebra and geometry. Everyone 
can thank their lucky stars I didn't go in for Rocket Science! 

Bob S


> On Feb 10, 2017, at 19:10 , Phil Davis via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> Your labels are one order of magnitude off the actual values, Bob. Say it 
> with me: 1,024,000,000 BYTES is "one billion bytes" (and change, depending on 
> whose standard you use). Of course one billion bytes is a gigabyte.
> 
> Same with the labeling of 1,024,000 BYTES = 1000kb = a megabyte, not a gig.
> 
> FWIW -
> Phil Davis


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-11 Thread hh via use-livecode
This is a well known visual phenomena:
When I'm tired I also switch sometimes 'in between reading'
the temporarily memorized decimal point from the beginning to
the end of a three-digit-block (did it recently in the forum).

It mostly works for me (if not 'computing') to force myself
to obey the rule, for the decimal prefixes, starting from Byte:

Kilobytes = 10^3  Bytes => cut most right three
MegaBytes = 10^6  Bytes => cut most right 6 (another three)  
GigaBytes = 10^9  Bytes => cut most right 9 (another three)
TeraBytes = 10^12 Bytes => cut most right 12 (another three)

As Phil hints, to use number words may be misleading here because
'billion' has different meanings in Europe (1 billion = 10^12) and
in the USA (1 billion = 10^9).

>> Bob S. wrote:
>> Isn't it kBytes not bits? So 32,000 * 32000 Bytes (a pixel takes up
>> one Byte in 8 bit color) which comes to 1,024,000,000 BYTES. That's
>> 1.024 terabytes, unless my faculties have wholly abandoned me.
>> Of course, a black and white image is 1,024,000 BYTES, or 1.023 GIGS,
>> but are we talking about black and white images?
>
> Phil D. wrote:
> Your labels are one order of magnitude off the actual values, Bob. Say 
> it with me: 1,024,000,000 BYTES is "one billion bytes" (and change, 
> depending on whose standard you use). Of course one billion bytes is a 
> gigabyte.
> Same with the labeling of 1,024,000 BYTES = 1000kb = a megabyte, not a gig.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Phil Davis via use-livecode
Your labels are one order of magnitude off the actual values, Bob. Say 
it with me: 1,024,000,000 BYTES is "one billion bytes" (and change, 
depending on whose standard you use). Of course one billion bytes is a 
gigabyte.


Same with the labeling of 1,024,000 BYTES = 1000kb = a megabyte, not a gig.

FWIW -
Phil Davis


On 2/10/17 6:57 PM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote:

isn't it kBytes not bits? So 32,000 * 32000 Bytes (a pixel takes up one Byte in 
8 bit color) which comes to 1,024,000,000 BYTES. That's 1.024 terabytes, unless 
my faculties have wholly abandoned me. Of course, a black and white image is 
1,024,000 BYTES, or 1.023 GIGS, but are we talking about black and white images?

That said, I am a couple strong ales in at this point, sooo...

Bob S



On Feb 10, 2017, at 10:33 , Mark Waddingham via use-livecode 
 wrote:

As you correctly point out 32k x 32k comes in at 1Gb pixels - which at 24-bit 
RGB comes out at 4Gb of data.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



--
Phil Davis


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
Essentially, eat the elephant one byte at a time. (see what I did there??)

Bob S


> On Feb 10, 2017, at 15:41 , Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> can't  thank you enough for all the extra info markI'm going to read it
> over a few times to make sure I got everything I could out of it.   will
> re-engage this idea as I go forward ... I still need to lock down my
> maximum presets, so I will still have to play with this in a week or so.
> 
> Thanks


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
isn't it kBytes not bits? So 32,000 * 32000 Bytes (a pixel takes up one Byte in 
8 bit color) which comes to 1,024,000,000 BYTES. That's 1.024 terabytes, unless 
my faculties have wholly abandoned me. Of course, a black and white image is 
1,024,000 BYTES, or 1.023 GIGS, but are we talking about black and white images?

That said, I am a couple strong ales in at this point, sooo...

Bob S


> On Feb 10, 2017, at 10:33 , Mark Waddingham via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> As you correctly point out 32k x 32k comes in at 1Gb pixels - which at 24-bit 
> RGB comes out at 4Gb of data. 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
I would second that, with an extension:  it would be most helpful to 
have some guidance on memory management overall.


Many see the total addressable space afforded by 64-bit systems as 
"Cool, I can use a 16-terabyte array!"


But as we've seen in bits and pieces here and elsewhere, total 
addressable memory is not what LC will necessarily use, or can use, for 
many tasks.  And it some cases it may not be what we really want to do.


OS APIs impose their own limits, and many other factors can come into 
play as well.


It would be useful to have at least some general guidance on what those 
limitations are, both in terms of LC as it is today and in terms where 
it bumps into system limits and general memory management challenges.


Often these implications aren't obvious.

For example, this morning I noted the difficulty with exporting an image 
of a 5000 X 5000 px button on Ubuntu.  Later I tried a set of much 
smaller objects but spread out much more broadly (10k px and more), and 
LC remained very responsive throughout - even exported the snapshot fine.


So I'm guessing from this that the difficulty with making unusually 
large standard controls was specific to how Linux' GDK handles them 
internally.  Indeed, making LC-handled objects, like graphics, 
apparently have no problem being rendered and buffered at such sizes.


Rather than make this an attempt at an exhaustive study of memory 
implications (though I'd gladly read it, it would take too long to 
write), it might be nice if Mark could draw from examples he's seen in 
the community over the years to outline some of the more commonly 
requested scenarios.


--
 Richard Gaskin


hh wrote:


Please post this "Split it!"- answer, as it is, in LC's blog.
This is good even for real beginners.

Large files or large data shouldn't be a reason for _incomplete_ 64Bit
implementations that would make once again LC Script slower.


Mark Waddingham wrote:
>
> Tom Glod wrote:
> I will... if u wanna replicate...put an image on a stack..make it
> 32k x 32k
> . and try and do a export snapshot of the image,  LC goes POOF...
> Trevor
> said tha last version of 8 (8.13)  had some memory issues solves, so i
> will try to test is there too.

Currently, the engine implements 'export snapshot' by allocating a
raster (32-bits per pixel) of the size of the snapshot you are making,
rendering into it and then compressing it.

So really the maximum size you could hope to snapshot is 16k x* 16k
pixels as that requires 2Gb - the engine in general uses signed integer
indicies, so the maximum memory buffer it can manipulate is 2Gb bytes. A
32-bit process would probably struggle to do that (due to only having
around 2-3Gb of user address space to use) - as there is overhead in
rasterization and then compression; but a 64-bit process should be fine.

There is a bug here as (at least in this specific case) the engine
should fail gracefully (as we know there is a hard limit in the size of
an image the engine can process).

As you correctly point out 32k x 32k comes in at 1Gb pixels - which at
24-bit RGB comes out at 4Gb of data. No 'normal' 32-bit application
which isn't explicitly designed for manipulating huge images will be
able to deal with something that size. I would expect applications such
as Photoshop to be able to deal with them though since I believe their
native raw storage format for images pages from disk as required (so you
never have the 'whole thing' in memory at once - just the bit you are
looking at / editing).

One important thing to remember is that the amount of memory required to
take a snapshot is (SOMECONSTANT * 4 * the number of pixels) in the rect
of the snapshot (I've not checked but I would estimate 0 < SOMECONSTANT
< 2) which means that you can get LiveCode to generate very large
images, but you have to break the problem down by splitting up the
snapshot into bands and probably use an external (command-line) tool to
compress the image into your format of choice (how big an image such a
tool can process, again, will be dependent on whether it needs to load
the entire image into memory to compress it or not).

Rough idea:

 repeat with i = 0 to pHeight / kBandSize
import snapshot from rect (0, pWidth, i * kBandSize, kBandSize)
write the imageData of the last image to file tOutputFile
delete the last image
 end repeat

After this you will have a very large file with the raw xRGB data in it,
so you need to find a tool which can take raw 32-bit xRGB data (with
specified order of the RGB), the width and height and process it into
jpg or png or whatever format you require (I'm hoping others who know
more about such things might be able to chime in here - ImageMagick has
an arsenal of command-line tools, for example).

Warmest Regards,

Mark.

P.S. There is a hard limit of co-ordinate magnitude in LC and thus the
size of any object - 32767 pixels on any side of anything.




Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Tom Glod via use-livecode
can't  thank you enough for all the extra info markI'm going to read it
over a few times to make sure I got everything I could out of it.   will
re-engage this idea as I go forward ... I still need to lock down my
maximum presets, so I will still have to play with this in a week or so.

Thanks

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 5:29 PM, hh via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Please post this "Split it!"- answer, as it is, in LC's blog.
> This is good even for real beginners.
>
> Large files or large data shouldn't be a reason for _incomplete_ 64Bit
> implementations that would make once again LC Script slower.
>
> > Mark Waddingham wrote:
> > >
> > > Tom Glod wrote:
> > > I will... if u wanna replicate...put an image on a stack..make it
> > > 32k x 32k
> > > . and try and do a export snapshot of the image,  LC goes POOF...
> > > Trevor
> > > said tha last version of 8 (8.13)  had some memory issues solves, so i
> > > will try to test is there too.
> >
> > Currently, the engine implements 'export snapshot' by allocating a
> > raster (32-bits per pixel) of the size of the snapshot you are making,
> > rendering into it and then compressing it.
> >
> > So really the maximum size you could hope to snapshot is 16k x* 16k
> > pixels as that requires 2Gb - the engine in general uses signed integer
> > indicies, so the maximum memory buffer it can manipulate is 2Gb bytes. A
> > 32-bit process would probably struggle to do that (due to only having
> > around 2-3Gb of user address space to use) - as there is overhead in
> > rasterization and then compression; but a 64-bit process should be fine.
> >
> > There is a bug here as (at least in this specific case) the engine
> > should fail gracefully (as we know there is a hard limit in the size of
> > an image the engine can process).
> >
> > As you correctly point out 32k x 32k comes in at 1Gb pixels - which at
> > 24-bit RGB comes out at 4Gb of data. No 'normal' 32-bit application
> > which isn't explicitly designed for manipulating huge images will be
> > able to deal with something that size. I would expect applications such
> > as Photoshop to be able to deal with them though since I believe their
> > native raw storage format for images pages from disk as required (so you
> > never have the 'whole thing' in memory at once - just the bit you are
> > looking at / editing).
> >
> > One important thing to remember is that the amount of memory required to
> > take a snapshot is (SOMECONSTANT * 4 * the number of pixels) in the rect
> > of the snapshot (I've not checked but I would estimate 0 < SOMECONSTANT
> > < 2) which means that you can get LiveCode to generate very large
> > images, but you have to break the problem down by splitting up the
> > snapshot into bands and probably use an external (command-line) tool to
> > compress the image into your format of choice (how big an image such a
> > tool can process, again, will be dependent on whether it needs to load
> > the entire image into memory to compress it or not).
> >
> > Rough idea:
> >
> >  repeat with i = 0 to pHeight / kBandSize
> > import snapshot from rect (0, pWidth, i * kBandSize, kBandSize)
> > write the imageData of the last image to file tOutputFile
> > delete the last image
> >  end repeat
> >
> > After this you will have a very large file with the raw xRGB data in it,
> > so you need to find a tool which can take raw 32-bit xRGB data (with
> > specified order of the RGB), the width and height and process it into
> > jpg or png or whatever format you require (I'm hoping others who know
> > more about such things might be able to chime in here - ImageMagick has
> > an arsenal of command-line tools, for example).
> >
> > Warmest Regards,
> >
> > Mark.
> >
> > P.S. There is a hard limit of co-ordinate magnitude in LC and thus the
> > size of any object - 32767 pixels on any side of anything.
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



-- 
*Tom Glod*

CEO @ *MakeShyft R.D.A* - www.makeshyft.com



Developer of *U.M.P* - www.IamUMP.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread hh via use-livecode
Please post this "Split it!"- answer, as it is, in LC's blog.
This is good even for real beginners.

Large files or large data shouldn't be a reason for _incomplete_ 64Bit
implementations that would make once again LC Script slower.

> Mark Waddingham wrote:
> >
> > Tom Glod wrote:
> > I will... if u wanna replicate...put an image on a stack..make it
> > 32k x 32k
> > . and try and do a export snapshot of the image,  LC goes POOF... 
> > Trevor
> > said tha last version of 8 (8.13)  had some memory issues solves, so i 
> > will try to test is there too.
> 
> Currently, the engine implements 'export snapshot' by allocating a 
> raster (32-bits per pixel) of the size of the snapshot you are making, 
> rendering into it and then compressing it.
> 
> So really the maximum size you could hope to snapshot is 16k x* 16k 
> pixels as that requires 2Gb - the engine in general uses signed integer 
> indicies, so the maximum memory buffer it can manipulate is 2Gb bytes. A 
> 32-bit process would probably struggle to do that (due to only having 
> around 2-3Gb of user address space to use) - as there is overhead in 
> rasterization and then compression; but a 64-bit process should be fine.
> 
> There is a bug here as (at least in this specific case) the engine 
> should fail gracefully (as we know there is a hard limit in the size of 
> an image the engine can process).
> 
> As you correctly point out 32k x 32k comes in at 1Gb pixels - which at 
> 24-bit RGB comes out at 4Gb of data. No 'normal' 32-bit application 
> which isn't explicitly designed for manipulating huge images will be 
> able to deal with something that size. I would expect applications such 
> as Photoshop to be able to deal with them though since I believe their 
> native raw storage format for images pages from disk as required (so you 
> never have the 'whole thing' in memory at once - just the bit you are 
> looking at / editing).
> 
> One important thing to remember is that the amount of memory required to 
> take a snapshot is (SOMECONSTANT * 4 * the number of pixels) in the rect 
> of the snapshot (I've not checked but I would estimate 0 < SOMECONSTANT 
> < 2) which means that you can get LiveCode to generate very large 
> images, but you have to break the problem down by splitting up the 
> snapshot into bands and probably use an external (command-line) tool to 
> compress the image into your format of choice (how big an image such a 
> tool can process, again, will be dependent on whether it needs to load 
> the entire image into memory to compress it or not).
> 
> Rough idea:
> 
>  repeat with i = 0 to pHeight / kBandSize
> import snapshot from rect (0, pWidth, i * kBandSize, kBandSize)
> write the imageData of the last image to file tOutputFile
> delete the last image
>  end repeat
> 
> After this you will have a very large file with the raw xRGB data in it, 
> so you need to find a tool which can take raw 32-bit xRGB data (with 
> specified order of the RGB), the width and height and process it into 
> jpg or png or whatever format you require (I'm hoping others who know 
> more about such things might be able to chime in here - ImageMagick has 
> an arsenal of command-line tools, for example).
> 
> Warmest Regards,
> 
> Mark.
> 
> P.S. There is a hard limit of co-ordinate magnitude in LC and thus the 
> size of any object - 32767 pixels on any side of anything.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Mark Waddingham via use-livecode

On 2017-02-10 03:38, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote:
I will... if u wanna replicate...put an image on a stack..make it 32k x 
32k
.and try and do a export snapshot of the image,  LC goes POOF... 
Trevor
said tha last version of 8 (8.13)  had some memory issues solves, so i 
will

try to test is there too.


Currently, the engine implements 'export snapshot' by allocating a 
raster (32-bits per pixel) of the size of the snapshot you are making, 
rendering into it and then compressing it.


So really the maximum size you could hope to snapshot is 16k x* 16k 
pixels as that requires 2Gb - the engine in general uses signed integer 
indicies, so the maximum memory buffer it can manipulate is 2Gb bytes. A 
32-bit process would probably struggle to do that (due to only having 
around 2-3Gb of user address space to use) - as there is overhead in 
rasterization and then compression; but a 64-bit process should be fine.


There is a bug here as (at least in this specific case) the engine 
should fail gracefully (as we know there is a hard limit in the size of 
an image the engine can process).


As you correctly point out 32k x 32k comes in at 1Gb pixels - which at 
24-bit RGB comes out at 4Gb of data. No 'normal' 32-bit application 
which isn't explicitly designed for manipulating huge images will be 
able to deal with something that size. I would expect applications such 
as Photoshop to be able to deal with them though since I believe their 
native raw storage format for images pages from disk as required (so you 
never have the 'whole thing' in memory at once - just the bit you are 
looking at / editing).


One important thing to remember is that the amount of memory required to 
take a snapshot is (SOMECONSTANT * 4 * the number of pixels) in the rect 
of the snapshot (I've not checked but I would estimate 0 < SOMECONSTANT 
< 2) which means that you can get LiveCode to generate very large 
images, but you have to break the problem down by splitting up the 
snapshot into bands and probably use an external (command-line) tool to 
compress the image into your format of choice (how big an image such a 
tool can process, again, will be dependent on whether it needs to load 
the entire image into memory to compress it or not).


Rough idea:

repeat with i = 0 to pHeight / kBandSize

  import snapshot from rect (0, pWidth, i * kBandSize, kBandSize)

  write the imageData of the last image to file tOutputFile

  delete the last image

   end repeat

After this you will have a very large file with the raw xRGB data in it, 
so you need to find a tool which can take raw 32-bit xRGB data (with 
specified order of the RGB), the width and height and process it into 
jpg or png or whatever format you require (I'm hoping others who know 
more about such things might be able to chime in here - ImageMagick has 
an arsenal of command-line tools, for example).


Warmest Regards,

Mark.

P.S. There is a hard limit of co-ordinate magnitude in LC and thus the 
size of any object - 32767 pixels on any side of anything.


--
Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Dr. Hawkins via use-livecode
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Granted LC should never crash, it whould warn the end user that the data
> exceeds limits, but if I understand what you are doing, it's unreasonable
> to expect any application to do this.
>
>
An, err, long time ago, I found that I could consistently crash both
FreeBSD and Linux by loading a file larger than virtual memory into a
binary editor . . .  (I had had to make an image of a hard disk to search
for versions of a paper when ~ got deleted.  While an older machine, the
hard drive than even VM on the other machine.  I eventually got the paper
back [maybe I split the file?]   . . . just manipulating it was no small
task.  [maybe I finally filtered the disk through strings or tr to a file
on a zip disk for transport?])


-- 
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq.
(702) 508-8462
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
That is a 28 FOOT image!!! at 8 bits per pixel that's 8.2 terabytes. At 24 bits 
per pixel it's 24.5 terabytes! Am I missing something?? My math skills may 
not be the best:

32000*32000*24

Granted LC should never crash, it whould warn the end user that the data 
exceeds limits, but if I understand what you are doing, it's unreasonable to 
expect any application to do this. 

Bob S



> On Feb 9, 2017, at 18:38 , Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> I will... if u wanna replicate...put an image on a stack..make it 32k x 32k
> .and try and do a export snapshot of the image,  LC goes POOF... Trevor
> said tha last version of 8 (8.13)  had some memory issues solves, so i will
> try to test is there too.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode

Tom Glod wrote:

> 10 K in resolution
>
> I'm going to do more tests with the 2 cache settings . compositor
> cache and image cache. increasing these definately lets me export
> snapshots of larger groups...but I have not succeeded in going past
> 10 K I can display up to 32k. but snapshot export just hard
> crashes Livecode as soon as it is triggered.   32,000*32,000*4 is
> 4GB+ .. I would like my customers to be able to output their
> content as large images.  10 k is large enough for now.

Curious about this, I ran a test in LC 9 with a new stack with one 
button containing this script:


on mouseUp
   set the rect of me to 0,0,6000,6000
   put specialFolderPath("desktop")&"/TestBigImage.png" into tFile
   export snapshot from me to file tFile as PNG
end mouseUp

On Ubuntu 14.04 w/8GB RAM I get the image file generated within seconds, 
but then LC takes another several seconds (almost a full minute!) with 
one CPU core maxed until it goes back to a normal idle.


Worse, while writing this email I was switching back and forth between 
my email client and LC, and apparently resume also takes nearly a full 
minute of maxed CPU before I'm able to work.


I'll run strace with that and file a bug report later to see what could 
be done, but back to your app's need:


Is raster output the best option for your users?

Even at 10k px that'll be a pretty big file, unwieldy in many image apps 
(and apparently prohibitive to export in the Linux version of LC currently).


It would be tedious but not too difficult to write a CardToSVG function 
instead, giving your users a widely-supported vector format whose file 
will be only slightly larger than the stack it was generated from 
(relatively speaking; being a plain-text format I'd guess the output 
size would be a small multiple of the stack file size, but certainly far 
less than a raster representation of the same layout).


I know Alejandro had written some SVG importers some time ago - anyone 
here have at least the beginnings of an SVG exporter we could build upon 
as a community project?


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-10 Thread Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
On 2/9/2017 9:19 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote:
>> On 10 Feb 2017, at 1:03 pm, Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> trying to export snapshots of lage groups with many image controls. 
>> can't get past 10k
> 10k controls or 10k pixels. Control rect origins are 16 bit ints and sizes 
> are 16 bit unsigned ints so if you are trying to position a control at > 
> 32767 then it won’t work. That won’t change when we compile the engine as 64 
> bit.
>
>
This is one reason I asked what specific limits are being run into. Juts
making "64-bit" versions of LC for OSX or Window will not magically fix
all limits in LiveCode that exists. Many are based on a coded 16 bit or
32 bit bounds. When running into limits, it is better to report the
specific limit - as a bug report at http://quality.livecode.com/ -
rather than looking for 64 bit versions of the engine. It *may* be that
64 bit address spaces is needed to expand the limit, but the again, it
may not.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Tom Glod via use-livecode
I will... if u wanna replicate...put an image on a stack..make it 32k x 32k
.and try and do a export snapshot of the image,  LC goes POOF... Trevor
said tha last version of 8 (8.13)  had some memory issues solves, so i will
try to test is there too.

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

>
> > On 10 Feb 2017, at 1:33 pm, Tom Glod via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >
> > but snapshot export just hard crashes Livecode as
> > soon as it is triggered
>
> If you have a recipe for a hard crash please post  bug report
>
> Cheers
>
> Monte
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



-- 
*Tom Glod*

CEO @ *MakeShyft R.D.A* - www.makeshyft.com



Developer of *U.M.P* - www.IamUMP.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Monte Goulding via use-livecode

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 1:33 pm, Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> but snapshot export just hard crashes Livecode as
> soon as it is triggered

If you have a recipe for a hard crash please post  bug report

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Tom Glod via use-livecode
10 K in resolution

I'm going to do more tests with the 2 cache settings . compositor cache
and image cache. increasing these definately lets me export snapshots
of larger groups...but I have not succeeded in going past 10 K I can
display up to 32k. but snapshot export just hard crashes Livecode as
soon as it is triggered.   32,000*32,000*4 is 4GB+ .. I would like
my customers to be able to output their content as large images.  10 k is
large enough for now.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Monte Goulding via use-livecode

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 1:03 pm, Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> trying to export snapshots of lage groups with many image controls. 
> can't get past 10k

10k controls or 10k pixels. Control rect origins are 16 bit ints and sizes are 
16 bit unsigned ints so if you are trying to position a control at > 32767 then 
it won’t work. That won’t change when we compile the engine as 64 bit.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Tom Glod via use-livecode
sounds good i'll wait patientlythanks alot for confirming its a WIP.

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

>
> > On 10 Feb 2017, at 1:04 pm, Tom Glod via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >
> > thanks monte. thats what i wanted to hearsorry i didn't notice
> the
> > osx 64 builds. only ever saw llinux 64.. but i work on
> > windowsso its music to my ears. what are we looking at ?...a few
> > months?
>
> I’m not really sure when the first versions will make a stable release but
> the work required to get things building on our build servers is on the go.
> It requires some drastic changes to things is all I know. Peter, Mark or
> Fraser would be better to give you more detail than that ;-)
>
> Cheers
>
> Monte
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



-- 
*Tom Glod*

CEO @ *MakeShyft R.D.A* - www.makeshyft.com



Developer of *U.M.P* - www.IamUMP.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Monte Goulding via use-livecode

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 1:04 pm, Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> thanks monte. thats what i wanted to hearsorry i didn't notice the
> osx 64 builds. only ever saw llinux 64.. but i work on
> windowsso its music to my ears. what are we looking at ?...a few
> months?

I’m not really sure when the first versions will make a stable release but the 
work required to get things building on our build servers is on the go. It 
requires some drastic changes to things is all I know. Peter, Mark or Fraser 
would be better to give you more detail than that ;-)

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Tom Glod via use-livecode
thanks monte. thats what i wanted to hearsorry i didn't notice the
osx 64 builds. only ever saw llinux 64.. but i work on
windowsso its music to my ears. what are we looking at ?...a few
months?

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Tom Glod  wrote:

> trying to export snapshots of lage groups with many image controls. 
> can't get past 10k
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/9/2017 8:40 PM, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote:
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > Does anyone know if there are plans for 64 bit windows and mac builds
>> > anytime soon? I'm bumping up against limits that seems all too
>> ancient
>> > to be deallng with in 2017.
>> >
>>
>> Out of curiosity, what specific LC limits are you running into? Do you
>> need a field to hold more than 4GB of text? A limit on sizes of Arrays?
>> Something else?
>>
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Tom Glod*
>
> CEO @ *MakeShyft R.D.A* - www.makeshyft.com
>
>
>
> Developer of *U.M.P* - www.IamUMP.com
>



-- 
*Tom Glod*

CEO @ *MakeShyft R.D.A* - www.makeshyft.com



Developer of *U.M.P* - www.IamUMP.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Tom Glod via use-livecode
trying to export snapshots of lage groups with many image controls. 
can't get past 10k

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> On 2/9/2017 8:40 PM, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Does anyone know if there are plans for 64 bit windows and mac builds
> > anytime soon? I'm bumping up against limits that seems all too
> ancient
> > to be deallng with in 2017.
> >
>
> Out of curiosity, what specific LC limits are you running into? Do you
> need a field to hold more than 4GB of text? A limit on sizes of Arrays?
> Something else?
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



-- 
*Tom Glod*

CEO @ *MakeShyft R.D.A* - www.makeshyft.com



Developer of *U.M.P* - www.IamUMP.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Monte Goulding via use-livecode

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 12:40 pm, Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know if there are plans for 64 bit windows and mac builds
> anytime soon? I'm bumping up against limits that seems all too ancient
> to be deallng with in 2017.
> 
> Just wanna know if its wishful thinking at this point or if its feasible to
> wait for 65 bit builds and save myself the work of optimizng for 32-bit?

Hi Tom

Mac 64 bit has been available for quite some time now. Windows 64 bit is in 
motion.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Re: Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
On 2/9/2017 8:40 PM, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Does anyone know if there are plans for 64 bit windows and mac builds
> anytime soon? I'm bumping up against limits that seems all too ancient
> to be deallng with in 2017.
>

Out of curiosity, what specific LC limits are you running into? Do you
need a field to hold more than 4GB of text? A limit on sizes of Arrays?
Something else?

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


Windows and OSX 64-bit builds?

2017-02-09 Thread Tom Glod via use-livecode
Hi folks,

Does anyone know if there are plans for 64 bit windows and mac builds
anytime soon? I'm bumping up against limits that seems all too ancient
to be deallng with in 2017.

Just wanna know if its wishful thinking at this point or if its feasible to
wait for 65 bit builds and save myself the work of optimizng for 32-bit?

Thanks,


*Tom Glod*

CEO @ *MakeShyft R.D.A* - www.makeshyft.com



Developer of *U.M.P* - www.IamUMP.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode