Return-Path: 
 <user-return-6707-apmail-pivot-user-archive=pivot.apache.org@pivot.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-pivot-user-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-pivot-user-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DB9DAB1FD
	for <apmail-pivot-user-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:14:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 14949 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jan 2012 14:13:57 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-pivot-user-archive@pivot.apache.org
Received: (qmail 14715 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jan 2012 14:13:56 -0000
Mailing-List: contact user-help@pivot.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:user-help@pivot.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:user-unsubscribe@pivot.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:user@pivot.apache.org>
List-Id: <user.pivot.apache.org>
Reply-To: user@pivot.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list user@pivot.apache.org
Received: (qmail 14697 invoked by uid 99); 20 Jan 2012 14:13:56 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:13:56 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [74.125.83.54] (HELO mail-ee0-f54.google.com) (74.125.83.54)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:13:49 +0000
Received: by eekb47 with SMTP id b47so237125eek.13
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 06:13:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.10.32 with SMTP id 32mr3417302eeu.8.1327068807524;
        Fri, 20 Jan 2012 06:13:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.11.102] (94-75-90-35.home.aster.pl. [94.75.90.35])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c16sm12008679eei.1.2012.01.20.06.13.25
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 20 Jan 2012 06:13:26 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4F197684.3090002@sages.com.pl>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:13:24 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?UGlvdHIgS2/FgmFjemtvd3NraQ==?=
 <p.kolaczkowski@sages.com.pl>
Organization: Sages
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64;
 rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Noel Grandin <noelgrandin@gmail.com>
CC: user@pivot.apache.org, dev@pivot.apache.org
Subject: Re: Double buffering of components
References: <4F192F4D.1050909@sages.com.pl> <4F1963AF.5080104@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F1963AF.5080104@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hmm,

Can't see a difference. But I have to profile it to see what is causing 
the slowdown.
Thanks for the patch.

-- Piotr

W dniu 20.01.2012 13:53, Noel Grandin pisze:
>
> Hmm, interesting idea.
>
> This is a prototype patch. Try it out and let me know how it goes.
>
> -- Noel Grandin
>
> On 2012-01-20 11:09, Piotr Kołaczkowski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there support for explicit double-buffering of components 
>> (especially windows) like it is in Swing?
>> Currently I faced another performance problem - imagine a top level 
>> Window with a one single Frame open in it.
>> The Window contains an animation, that needs to be repainted at >30 
>> FPS. When I issue the repaint, not only the window gets repainted, 
>> but also the parts of the frame that happened to be inside the 
>> repaint region (if the user shadows a part of the animation with the 
>> frame, the frame gets the repaints).
>> For complex Frames with lots of components inside them, it may be 
>> slow. And it is not needed, because I actually haven't changed 
>> anything inside the frame, so it is perfect case for double buffering 
>> and drawing the whole frame with a single drawImage statement.
>>
>> So, is there a workaround now for this? Is this planned?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Piotr
>>


-- 
Piotr Kołaczkowski
senior consultant
Sages Sp. z o.o.
www.sages.com.pl