On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 03:17:27PM +0200, Udo Giacomozzi wrote: > A good profiling movie is not that easy to build and must contain a > variety of typical rendering situations like complex and simple > graphics, static and moving objects, simple and complex fills and so > on. To really compare rendering performance you need to build a movie > that steps through different scenes specifically built for different > situations.
For some background, Kristian's case is the case of a company that produces the SWF internally. The profiling goal for them is to improve gnash run of the specific movies. In their case I've observed that bitmap fill rendering was the bottleneck and suggested to use vectors instead. As you noticed invalitated bounds doesn't do much good in there as these huge bitmaps shift to the right continuosly. One characteristic of these bitmaps, which *may* be common to other movies, is that the shape the bitmap fill is applied to doesn't change, and the matrix only changes for the translation part, not scale. If this case is really common, there might be an optimization possible, in particular just dumping a pre-calculated bitmap (save-as-bitmap like thing) to the target rectangle, rather then loop over each scanline and calling the bitmap accessors (which are also virtual calls). --strk; Free GIS & Flash consultant/developer () ASCII Ribbon Campaign http://foo.keybit.net/~strk/services.html /\ Keep it simple! _______________________________________________ Gnash-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
