I highly suspect the fill rate gains you get from using DirectComposition/Core Animation for scrolling/zooming *static* vector graphics in 2D completely outweigh any gains from any fancy GPU vector rendering algorithm you could come up with in practice.
-
-
I think instead of focusing on panning and zooming of static content, researchers would be better off focusing on known-problematic cases like complex PDFs where initial generation of the tiles is horribly slow today or on dynamic content, where tile caching isn't helpful.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Makes sense, and agreed! Although once you get to animation you have the nasty problem of picking "good" layers (and that too many layers is *also* slow), so it's not ridiculous to do "raw" rasterization comparisons for when you fall off the compositor cliff.
-
is the pan/zoom stuff "cheating" by getting to reuse preprocessing and gpu-binding, whereas you want to see more focus on cases where that isn't possible (or at least is non-trivial?)
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.