On 5 Apr, Kelly Martin wrote:
Tiles are 64x64 by default, and changing them is a bad idea because it
makes your .xcf files nontransportable.
Not to forget that this size is more or less hardcoded.
--
Servus,
Daniel
___
Gimp-developer
On Mon, 9 Apr 2001 23:02:44 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 5 Apr, Kelly Martin wrote:
Tiles are 64x64 by default, and changing them is a bad idea because
it makes your .xcf files nontransportable.
Not to forget that this size is more or less hardcoded.
It's a #define, yes. And
I think this is yet another tile-cache problem.
Georg Acher wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 12:45:52PM -0500, Kelly Martin wrote:
Hm, it does not. The issue with whirlpinch is that there's only a
weak locality relationship between destionation pixels (which are
iterated across the
Hi,
I don't know who's currently "responsible" for the whirlpinch plugin, so I
post my patch to this list.
I have modified whirlpinch slightly to use "blocking", ie. doing all
calculations in small squares (32*32). With that technique very common in
numerical computing, the CPU caches (and for
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 12:36:05 -0500, Kelly Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I have modified whirlpinch slightly to use "blocking", ie. doing
all calculations in small squares (32*32). With that technique very
common in numerical computing, the CPU caches (and for GIMP) the
tile cache have a much
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 12:45:52PM -0500, Kelly Martin wrote:
Hm, it does not. The issue with whirlpinch is that there's only a
weak locality relationship between destionation pixels (which are
iterated across the image) and source pixels (which are fetched with
the pixel fetcher). I
