If I understand this right, I also think the "simple" test is all that
is needed. The only interesting matrixes are 1:1 scale with integer
translations. There are exactly eight arrangements of the upper-left
corner: with ±1 in location 0,0 and 1,1, and with ±1 in locations 0,1
and 1,0. I think
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Siarhei Siamashka
wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Andrea Canciani wrote:
>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Andrea Canciani wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:15 PM, Siarhei Siamashka
>>> wrote:
From: Siarhei Siamashka
Simple rotati
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Andrea Canciani wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Andrea Canciani wrote:
>> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:15 PM, Siarhei Siamashka
>> wrote:
>>> From: Siarhei Siamashka
>>>
>>> Simple rotation and translation are the additional cases when BILINEAR
>>> filte
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Taekyun Kim wrote:
> Patch 1
I had a look at these patches and tested them a bit. So now I can
provide some (hopefully constructive) feedback.
Would it make sense to handle REPEAT_NORMAL optimizations separately
for nearest and bilinear scaling? I mean, you poste
---
pixman/Makefile.win32 |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/pixman/Makefile.win32 b/pixman/Makefile.win32
index b5f9397..7c92722 100644
--- a/pixman/Makefile.win32
+++ b/pixman/Makefile.win32
@@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ SOURCES = \
p
