On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 23:13:03 +0200, Øyvind Kolås <pippin@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > modifying that code base to deal with this properly will most probably > been seen as more lasting contributions than changing code that > eventually only will live on machines running legacy 2.4 series GIMP > due either to low performance hardware hmm, just reread this. Does that comment indicate that GEGL is a lot more resource hungry than gimp? I'd wondered if that might the case when I initially looked at the way it was structured. thx. _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
