On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 10:25 -0400, Ian Lawrence wrote:

> > What sort of specific resources are we talking here ?
> would be a GPU :-0
> 
> Others are looking at performance issues too
> http://lists.o-hand.com/clutter/1209.html
> and it seems loading images into GL textures is an expensive process
> which can only realistically be achieved with extra hardware and/or
> some future caching system . This cost needs to be taken into
> consideration when other solutions like EFL already exist and have
> been proven to work well in this space.

you have taken that email completely out of context.

pushing textures on the GL pipeline is an expensive operation which
entirely depends on the memory and bandwidth available; aside from some
state caching and avoiding known slow operations (like uploading a
texture in the middle of a paint sequence, especially on GLES hardware),
there isn't much anyone can do since it's a hardware issue.

software rendering is plagued by the same issue, with one important
difference: if you use the GPU you won't be blocking the CPU as well -
software rendering cannot do that; not only it cannot do that, it will
also be susceptible of processes blocking the CPU. and at the end of the
day it will still require to upload data to the GPU in order to display
it on the screen.

GPUs are here to stay.

> Ever since Emmanuele pointed out the class clutter.Script(GObject) to
> me I thought that this could be a good place  for function calls like
> clutter.Script.compress_objects and clutter.Script.cache_objects

ClutterScript has *zero* to do with caching or compressing objects. what
would you mean by "compressing" a GObject, by the way, I have absolutely
*no* idea.

I'm really sorry, but apparently you haven't any knowledge of what
Clutter does internally, so you should either read the documentation and
the code or refrain from commenting on this to avoid generating further
confusion in a thread that's already pretty messy.

+++

we've been kind of sidetracked along the deficiencies of EFL, or its
supposed benefits. the main reason why EFL is not a good candidate for
moblin is that it's completely alien to the technologies that compose
the moblin platform itself. it brings along its own dependencies and
nothing else uses them. Clutter, on the other hand, is tightly
integrated with the rest of the GNOME Mobile platform.

EFL and the whole enlightenment framework has a poorly-defined roadmap,
it's known to be late in deliverables, it's poorly known as a framework
in the community, it tends to reinvent technologies just for the sake of
it, it does not integrate with anything else that has been defined as a
required technology for moblin, and in any way possible is not able to
deliver, or be a part of, an interesting and successful platform.

ciao,
 Emmanuele.

-- 
Emmanuele Bassi, Intel Open Source Technology Center

_______________________________________________
Moblin dev Mailing List
[email protected]

To manage or unsubscribe from this mailing list visit:
https://lists.moblin.org/mailman/listinfo/dev or your user account on 
http://moblin.org once logged in.

For more information on the Moblin Developer Mailing lists visit:
http://moblin.org/community/mailing-lists

Reply via email to