Re: [PATCH] Use GdkPixbufLoader for thumbnailer to reduce memory consumption

[Christian Neumair <chris gnome-de org>]

Am Dienstag, den 30.05.2006, 15:31 +0200 schrieb Alexander Larsson:
> On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 22:15 +0200, Christian Neumair wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 11.05.2006, 16:50 +0200 schrieb Alexander Larsson:
> > > On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 13:13 +0200, Christian Neumair wrote:
> > > > > The framing logic isn't the same as before. There are certain images
> > > > > that get a frame now that didn't before and vice versa. Totem thumbnails
> > > > > at low zoom levels didn't get one before but do now. Some images in
> > > > > ~/backgrounds don't get a frame anymore at low zoom now, but did before.
> > > > > I think the size comparison in
> > > > > 
> > > > > > +if ((is_thumbnail || size > NAUTILUS_ICON_SIZE_THUMBNAIL) && !
> > > > > > gdk_pixbuf_get_has_alpha (pixbuf)) {
> > > > > 
> > > > > doesn't do the same as it did before because the pixmap has already been
> > > > > scaled at that point now.
> > > > 
> > > > To be honest I don't understand why we're adding frames to pixbufs that
> > > > don't come from ~/.thumbnails at all.
> > > 
> > > Why should how we implement thumbnailing of image files affect how they
> > > are shown? That is just an implementation detail. The difference between
> > > thumbnail-as-itself and real thumbnail very non-obvious to users.
> > 
> > I see. I added code to correctly compare the original image size instead
> > of the pixbuf size against NAUTILUS_ICON_SIZE_THUMBNAIL.
> 
> Looks good to me. The only thing i noticed was:
> 
> +	int size = MAX (width, height);
> ...
> +		args->base_size = MAX (width, height);                        
> 
> You could re-use size here instead of recalculating it.
> 
> Please commit (to HEAD only).

Done.

-- 
Christian Neumair <chris gnome-de org>