Fwd: Why are people sticking with GTK+ 26.? (Re: GTK+ modularization)


there 's at least one : Pango is using Cairo, cairo is a double based vector graphics engine... Pango became slower since it is using it.

On embedded platform the cost for calculations with double is really heavy. Embedded computing does not benefit from the pseudo empiric "intel moore law" at the same pace than desktop computing.

Would be nice if Cairo could exist in an embedded version with fixed point calculations. The embedded version of Open GL is using fixed point calculations so why not Cairo ?

- Paul.

On Jul 20, 2006, at 2:09 AM, Carl Worth wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:58:41 -0700, "Jesse Donaldson" wrote:
We're still using v2.6, so folks may not care, but I'm happy to share our results (once we've obtained them). Also, if
he'd like, I can try to put Mathias in touch with whoever will be
looking at this on our end.

I'm personally interested in hearing more details about what your
motivation for sticking with 2.6 is. If it's performance concerns, (as
is the case with others I've talked to), then I should point out that
I'm personally very interested, and planning on fixing those
performance problems.

There's no good reason that GTK+ should have ever gotten slower. So
I'll be working to fix performance regressions. But I need help
identifying them. So anything anyone can share about things they have
hit would be useful. (And thanks to those who have already started
identifying things here on this list.)

cworth redhat com
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]