Browse thread
Weak hashtables & aggressive caching
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2006-08-14 (23:25) |
From: | Matt Gushee <matt@g...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Weak hashtables & aggressive caching |
Richard Jones wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 10:28:39AM -0600, Matt Gushee wrote: >> Wait a minute, though. According to the Gdk reference manual, >> <http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gdk/gdk-Pixbufs.html#id2861842> >> >> Pixbufs are client-side images. > > Ah right, pixbufs, pixmaps ... In that case why bother preloading > them at all? Well, maybe I shouldn't. That's why I asked if it was worth the effort. > eog is flagrant with regards to pixmaps because the > developers believe it allows them to display images quickly (the > images are already on the X server, converted from JPEGs into raw > pixels). In this age of fast CPUs and slow RAM this is unlikely to be > the case. Thanks for your insights. -- Matt Gushee : Bantam - lightweight file manager : matt.gushee.net/software/bantam/ : : RASCL's A Simple Configuration Language : matt.gushee.net/rascl/ :