Its entirely possible that I'm missing something, but I was merely inquiring about running the same timing tests that you did with mplib, but instead using the existing MKII and MKIV image inclusion code.  How much of a speedup over the existing code does the mplib integration buy us for this benchmark?


-----Original Message-----
From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl on behalf of Hans Hagen
Sent: Fri 3/14/2008 12:46 PM
To: mailing list for ConTeXt users
Subject: Re: [NTG-context] mplib
 
Santy, Michael wrote:
> Hans,
> 
> Sounds pretty impressive.  As a point of reference, do you have timing 
> data for the existing MKII and MKIV image processing code?

you mean a difference in speed? it depends on how complex the search is, 
but in general the mkiv code is faster and more robust there and has 
more potential for plugins; also mkiv does runtime conversion if needed; 
of course inclusion itself is not faster while (eventually) manipulation 
will be

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
      tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________