From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/39509 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Santy, Michael" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: mplib Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:51:29 -0500 Message-ID: <6703815B292B664DBAEC55EE3192386A20BFDF@poseidon.in.dynetics.com> References: <47DAB3FD.2050503@wxs.nl><6703815B292B664DBAEC55EE3192386A20BFDE@poseidon.in.dynetics.com> <47DAB9F9.8040706@wxs.nl> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1958658492==" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205517380 32650 80.91.229.12 (14 Mar 2008 17:56:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:56:20 +0000 (UTC) To: "mailing list for ConTeXt users" Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Fri Mar 14 18:56:41 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JaE8n-0005sC-TX for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:56:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C7C81FBF9; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:55:46 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 05533-04-8; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:55:06 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9AA21FB33; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:55:06 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C7511FB1F for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:55:05 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 08294-01-5 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:54:33 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from myrddin.dynetics.com (myrddin.dynetics.com [204.154.192.33]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF1071FB77 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:54:32 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from poseidon.in.dynetics.com ([10.1.15.106]) by myrddin.dynetics.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m2EHkYPB022049 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:46:39 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [NTG-context] mplib Thread-Index: AciF+9JwTq0Mh5fwTPOQceqwSYDvzgAADX2I X-dynetics.com-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-dynetics.com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1.439, required 2, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44, HTML_MESSAGE 0.00) X-MailScanner-From: michael.santy@dynetics.com X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:39509 Archived-At: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1958658492== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C885FC.52782A9E" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C885FC.52782A9E Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 =20 Santy, Michael wrote: > Hans, >=20 > 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=20 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 _________________________________________________________________________= __________ ------_=_NextPart_001_01C885FC.52782A9E Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [NTG-context] mplib

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

-----------------------------------------------------------------
            &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;      Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
            &= nbsp;  Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
      tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | = www.pragma-ade.com
            &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;         | = 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
_________________________________________________________________________= __________

------_=_NextPart_001_01C885FC.52782A9E-- --===============1958658492== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________ --===============1958658492==--