Benchmarking OpenGL/Vulkan/etc. code is easy because the GPU basically does what you tell it to, without a lot of magic caches and whatnot in between. Benchmarking vector graphics APIs, on the other hand…
-
-
Sounds like static vs dynamic optimization trade off. User might know some frequency info, if the content is first-party, but won’t know the caching costs/gains (or track them well over time). I’d want a way to say “help me as you see fit” as well as explicit control, I think.
-
Yeah, that’s what the high-level APIs would be for.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
what if the cache control API was easily pluggable and it came with a few built-in implementations? A "simple" one, a "no caching" one, and ones tuned for specific use-cases like: font rendering, svg, canvas, etc. If possible, it'd be benchmark friendly & self-documenting. ?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think "do something" and "(maybe) cache this" are 2 different things. Making them modular is the right thing to do. Also allows users to exchange / configure / control / debug both of them separately. One could even split the cache decision and the cache storage.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.