Hi,
Can I get any input if my second patch follows "the right approach"? Are
there any astylerc or clang_format to check that my code complies with
code style ?
Thanks
On 04/19/2018 08:41 PM, Marc Jeanmougin wrote:
Hi,
Could anyone help me from here? If there is still a f
On 04/08/2018 10:46 PM, Marc Jeanmougin wrote:
> Hi, I'm back :)
>
>
> I tried to implement the proposed changes :
>
> * the gradient walker now deals with argb_t (floats) and not uint32_t
> * all gradients are WIDE because of the above change
> * WIDE formats (usin
pted.
--
Marc
From 2cd0d0a12c9a68bdedde10ae4b10c335f8961501 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Marc Jeanmougin
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 22:25:27 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Adds a gradient dithering function to pixman.
This dithering is random, resulting is no artifacts and very smooth result,
and uses a very fast prng (xorshi
ness is almost negligible ("good
except for the small stripes" dithering may in fact be slower)
--
Marc
From 85aa2a84e74f3079796ec4686c4fa2acf6c2e93f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Marc Jeanmougin
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 21:36:10 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Adds PIXMAN_DITHERING_GOOD wit
Hi,
Le 27/03/2018 à 02:04, Søren Sandmann a écrit :
> A long time ago I wrote this:
>
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pixman/2012-July/002175.html
>
> about how dithering could be added to pixman. The basic idea is that
> "dithering" is a property of the destination image, not of the
thering function to pixman.
This dithering is random, resulting is no artifacts and very smooth result,
and uses a very fast prng (xorshift algorithm).
Also adds a pixman_image_set_dithering to toggle the feature,
and a pixman_dithering_t type for possible future other implementations.
Signe
