keithp at keithp.com
Tue Nov 22 17:27:57 PST 2005
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 13:03 -0800, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> Another possible better fix is that resizes should copy *into* the
> backing buffer the current contents of the screen. Then if it
> accidentally gets swapped back before the program finishes drawing it,
> the user will not see any change in the undrawn areas.
Composite does this.
> I agree. It would be nice if *all* backing copies went to the same area,
> no matter how they are created. Ignore any minor glitches (ie I think
> the composite extension could show partially-updated backbuffer, just
> try to avoid recompositing except when a program sends the
> back-buffer-swap command).
Most apps that 'double buffer' do it themselves with a separate pixmap;
it's more portable, and gives reliable results. This makes solving the
DOUBLE-BUFFER case a lot less interesting.
Of course, backing store should be implemented with Composite in any
case; it's far more efficient and follows the protocol specification
correctly (unlike the existing backing store code which saves far too
much). If we do that, we'll eliminate miles of X server code, and the
separate buffering for backing store as well.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/cairo/attachments/20051122/f6bd0218/attachment.pgp
More information about the cairo