[cairo] gallium surface still maintained ?

Guillermo Rodriguez guillerodriguez.dev at gmail.com
Thu Aug 4 09:05:30 UTC 2016

Hi Lawrence,

2016-08-03 23:32 GMT+02:00 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo at geek-central.gen.nz>:

> On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:51:57 +0200, Guillermo Rodriguez wrote:
> > 2016-08-03 11:33 GMT+02:00 Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> > <ldo at geek-central.gen.nz>:
> >
> >> For comparison, Macintosh Color QuickDraw was capable of drawing
> >> full-colour, full-screen graphics at interactive speeds on a 25MHz
> >> Motorola 68040 processor in 1993--within the above limitations.
> >
> > So did the Commodore Amiga on a 7MHz Motorola 68000 CPU at 1987 :)
> No it didn’t. The best it could manage was “HAM”, which was
> sort-of-12-bits-per-pixel, with limitations.

Yes, you are right :)
(Later, AGA introduced a modified HAM which was sort-of-18-bits-per-pixel,
with the same limitations)

When I said “full-colour”, I meant “24 bits per pixel”.
> > Which suggests that there should be no need to go for a "less resource
> > intensive" solution with today's CPUs.
> QuickDraw was much less resource-intensive than Cairo. Also much less
> sophisticated. Which is why I brought it up.

I know. My point was that if QuickDraw could do that on a 25MHz Motorola
68040, then there's no reason why Cairo shouldn't work just fine with
today's embedded CPUs (especially if hardware floating point is available),
even if a GPU is not available/not usable. Sure, Cairo is more
sophisticated, but the hardware is much more powerful also.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cairographics.org/archives/cairo/attachments/20160804/4778e783/attachment.html>

More information about the cairo mailing list