- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 17:10:36 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13096
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |NEEDSINFO
--- Comment #4 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-12-02 17:10:35 UTC ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
Status: Did Not Understand Request
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: Do you have data showing that setting all four bytes of a pixel at a
time is actually a performance problem? It seems highly unlikely to me that
with modern architectures there would be any practical difference. If anything,
setting one byte out of a 32bit word would seem to likely be more expensive
that setting all 4 bytes. Certainly if you're manipulating more than one pixel
at a time (which I assume in reality you would almost always be, since changing
just one pixel every 20ms would be an imperceptibly slow change to an image)
then it's quicker to just blit the entire image as one solid memory block than
it is to try to just push over the channels that have changed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 17:10:38 UTC