Here is 2nd testcases checking ca. 1900 fonts [...]
Thanks. Since this is a once-per-font operation, I don't think we
should think too much about timing issues. Please proceed.
Werner
___
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
Hi all,
Just I've committed to make tricky font detector to ignore
the existing checksum written in the TrueType header, like this.
In my benchmark, the latency in FT_New_Face() introduced
by this change is less than 0.01%. However, if anybody thinks
extra seek of the font file is problematic
Just I've committed to make tricky font detector to ignore the
existing checksum written in the TrueType header, [...]
Thanks!
Werner
___
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:07:22 +0900
mpsuz...@hiroshima-u.ac.jp wrote:
Anyway, my assumption might be wrong. I should check the
cost of checksum recalculation by some benchmarks...
Now I started the preliminary benchmark test about the
extra latency when we ignore predefined checksums and
calculate
Here is 2nd testcases checking ca. 1900 fonts (distributed in Debian
GNU/Linux). The cumulative latency is small again, but the average
latency to recalculate the checksum is 0.84 microsec, longer
than the 1st testcase.
0.60 microsec is spent to seek to the table (tt_face_goto_table()), and
0.23
