Salut Adam,
this is a theory that I'm currently validating... And I will try to
change the IPC message code to confirm that it will resolve the problem...
So I guess you don't see any problem in this approach... So if I succeed,
now I know who to ask for a code review :-)
Thanks!
BYE
MAD
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:44 PM, 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
