- From: Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 10:34:59 +0300
- To: Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com>
- Cc: Tyler Larson <talltyler@gmail.com>, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, whatwg@whatwg.org
Please see the DSP API [1]. It's currently developed unofficially under the W3C Audio WG [2], so if you have input, please post it to the audiowg public mailing list. This should scratch your itch and more. ;) Cheers, Jussi [1] http://people.opera.com/mage/dspapi/ [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/ On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com> wrote: > +1 > > Having matrix manipulation functions on ArrayBuffers that were > implemented at a lower, more optimised level would be awesome and would > open up all sorts of app opportunities. > > roBman > > On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 22:45:29 +0000 (UTC) > Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012, Tyler Larson wrote: > > > > > > Looping over every pixel in JavaScript is slow. Many cool things > > > could be taken care of much faster if the canvas had some form of > > > matrix manipulations built in. > > > > > > All of the pixels could have one transformation operation defined > > > and all of the pixels could be operated on at once in something > > > lower level. > > > > > > It could look like this... > > > > > > context.transformMatrix([0.5,0.5,0.5,0,0, > > > 0.5,0.5,0.5,0,0, > > > 0.5,0.5,0.5,0,0, > > > 0,0,0,1,0, > > > 0,0,0,0,1]); > > > > > > It's far simpler than looping over an array of pixels and picking > > > out the values of each color. > > > > > > Other graphics systems have ways of doing this already. You can > > > easily find sample tutorials on how to create and transform > > > matrixes. > > > > > > In some languages they have matrix objects that have methods for > > > even easier manipulation of these transformations but I'm cool > > > without this if it is easier. > > > > It seems like a reasonable suggestion, but since the pixel data is > > available as an ArrayBuffer, it seems like the more reasonable thing > > to do is to provide generic ArrayBuffer manipulation routines. > > > > I recommend raising this as feedback on the ArrayBuffer spec. > > > >
Received on Friday, 21 September 2012 07:36:24 UTC