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 ___________________________________________________________________________________