Monte Goulding wrote: >> With all due respect for the ambitious goals here, the further >> we look into this the more clear it becomes that scaling must >> be handled in the engine if we are to expect reasonable performance: >> >> <http://quality.runrev.com/show_bug.cgi?id=6589> > > Thanks Richard, I've voted for that now. > > Let's just presume that in the next year or so that enhancement > doesn't happen. That's probably being optimistic given all the > stuff RunRev have to deal with just to get engine parity. I think > that would be enough time to make it worthwhile to come up with > something.
You know me, Monte: I love a good workaround if it gets people back to work quickly.
I didn't mean to imply that no effort should me made toward workarounds at all, just that when we look at the full range of properties that need to be adjusted, we're going to have to accept some significant limitations in scope, performance, or both until this is done in the engine.
So my point was merely the hope that any effort to address this without engine support would not be misconstrued as there being no need for engine support.
-- Richard Gaskin Fourth World LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys _______________________________________________ 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
