Plasma::Svg question

[Toussis Manolis]

it's an applet that gets painted every 10 o more seconds.
So I think setOpacity isn't so expensive. (and ofcourse much easier)
Any problem with that? (I mean the refresh is very sparse)



On Tuesday 07 October 2008 00:21:27 Zack Rusin wrote:
> On Monday 06 October 2008 16:47:06 Rafael Fernández López wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > you can also call setOpacity on the QPainter directly, but that can
> > > *very* slow and that above method is usually faster, and at worst the
> > > same speed.
> >
> > Aaron explained it pretty well, and please, don't use setOpacity (as also
> > Aaron did suggest). I want to put emphasis here... since setOpacity
> > disables all the hardware acceleration (as Fredrik said: "the kiss of
> > death").
>
> I take your emphasis, headbutt it and fart in its face while its down.
>
> It's just so happens that Plasma's main platform is broken right now, but
> due to its brokenness you're emphasizing that you need to make all other
> systems that Plasma will be running on slower.
> It's certainly ok to optimize for the main platform but have knowledge of
> why you're doing so.
>
> setOpacity is bad only if you're working on an X11 system and are drawing
> to a QPixmap or a QWidget.
> If you're drawing to a qimage or any of the surfaces that use
> QGLPaintEngine then not using setOpacity is insane and using the extra
> composition is actually the slow path. Not to mention that drawing svg's on
> +90% of X11 systems will be faster if done on a qimage and then blitted,
> rather than drawn on a QWidget/QPixmap directly.
>
> z
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plasma-devel mailing list
> Plasma-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20081008/5aa85368/attachment-0001.htm