Diego wrote:
> We decided to improve the line implementation to speed up the use of
> evas-lines in python (our case). Yes, we could just use polygons, but we are
> trying to reduce processor usage at this point.
> Its faster to draw lines (with lines implementation) directly, specially
> dealing with vertical/horizontal/45 deg. lines.
> Calculating where points of polygons must be drawn relative to width of line
> in python-side is a lost of processing too.
>
> Being faster, simpler and without breaking any compatibility, I dont know
> why Lines should not to have width support. Specially thinking about how
> simpler it makes to work with Lines.
> Yes, the code may be optimized, but its working fine and fast here.
>
>
It may be simpler to have your desired wide lines, but it's
not really any faster than using current polygons, nor is it really
accurate. But the real issue is simply that this is a terrible way
to introduce such abilities in evas - ie. the api (and internals).
As I mentioned in an earlier email, one should present this
in a more general form so that further stroke/fill aspects can be
exposed for not only lines but also rectangles, polygons, and maybe
other objects at a later point.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
