"David A. Bartold" <foxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I'm not convinced creating bitmaps specific to certain values of
> parameter subsets (such as angle, pressure, velocity, random, ordering,
> etc) is really the proper solution. It works okay if you want to change
> a tool depending on the value of one variable, but each time a parameter
> is added, the number of bitmaps increases manyfold. Basically the
> whole mechanism explodes in an exponential disaster. ;)
you are right. period.
But that leads to the question, if the whole pipe mechanism shouldn't
be expanded in a general way. I think of something like this:
Currently we have a multi-dimensional thing, where each point in that
space is represented by a bit/pixmap.
What I think of is the possibility to map a dimension to a supplied
function instead of giving the pixmaps explicitely. One could think of
something like threshold, rotating, scaling e.g.
This should of course be coupled with a LRU Cache of the generated
brushes.
Just a wild thought too early in the morning (OK, it's 12.20 now, but
still too early for me)
jtl
