Salut Aaron, no, this is not recent... This is something that was encountered a while back and put on a shelf because it wasn't critical... I'm now taking it off the shelf and trying to put an end to it :-)
Thanks! BYE MAD On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Aaron Boodman <a...@chromium.org> wrote: > Was this a recent regression? I made some changes in that area > recently to support transparent webviews. I tried not to change > anything in the case where transparency is not needed, but I imagine > this could have been me. > > Here is the change: > > > http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/chrome/browser/renderer_host/render_widget_host_unittest.cc?revision=14378&view=markup > > - a > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Adam Langley <a...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Marc-Andre Decoste <m...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> An alternative could be to send a bitmap the size of the union rect, > but > >> only paint the individual rects in it, and extract them individually on > the > >> other side of the IPC... But I wonder if it would be worth the added > >> complexity and risk... Unless I missed something (which is most probably > the > >> case :-)... > > > > Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding here. But is the problem that the area > of the > > union rectangle is significantly greater than the areas of the actually > damaged > > regions, thus we're painting too much? > > > > If that's the case, we could well change the PaintRect and ScrollRect > messages > > to carry a vector of rects and have them arranged in sequence in the > > TransportDIB. Since I'm currently to blame for much of the IPC painting > code, I > > can do this if it'll be of benefit. > > > > > > AGL > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
