From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <7871fcf5050131113724b79a68@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:37:30 -0500
From: Joel Salomon <joelcsalomon@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] point2rgb and point2rgba
In-Reply-To: <11d3735baba19e7c2a9a059159f39460@vitanuova.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <ee9e417a0501311057a027ecb@mail.gmail.com>
	<11d3735baba19e7c2a9a059159f39460@vitanuova.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3ab253a2-eace-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:19:53 0000, rog@vitanuova.com <rog@vitanuova.com> wr=
ote:
> there are applications that really do need to push lots of
> custom-generated pixels of data to the screen.  it seems a pity that
> this kind of thing is so heavily penalised in plan 9.  maybe it's just
> that so many of these kind of applications are basically frivolous
> (screensavers and games)...
>=20
IIRC, the XaoS fractal browser uses some form of double buffering and
whole-screen updates to get decent performance. My guess would be that
for 2-D graphics=E2=80=94even at the high end (like real-time MPEG-2 or MPE=
G-4
display)=E2=80=94such would be sufficient. Does the current draw device
penalize these operations so much?

--Joel