Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com> writes: > This is also a very useful test, but it effectively requires to have > an alternative double precision implementation for all the pixman > functionality to be verified. For bilinear scaling it means that at > least various types of repeats need to be handled, etc. And this > sounds like a lot of work.
Yeah, I agree that it's a lot of work and that dropping to 7 bits is easier in the short term. > > There are also some alternative variants. For example, allow a custom > prefix for public symbols in pixman (so that several pixman instances > can be loaded into test application at the same time). Or even update > the existing pixman tests to add xlib support and compare the locally > rendered results with xrender. The latter seems particularly useful, > because it could be also used for xrender implementation validation in > various hardware accelerated drivers (and complement/retire > rendercheck). Yet another variant is to get the single precision floating point pipeline working instead of the current 16 bit one, and then useit as the reference implementation. Søren _______________________________________________ Pixman mailing list Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
