diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Written/Notes')
| -rw-r--r-- | Written/Notes | 296 |
1 files changed, 296 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Written/Notes b/Written/Notes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3b9f416 --- /dev/null +++ b/Written/Notes @@ -0,0 +1,296 @@ + + +ClearArea +--------- +Basically a special case of PolyFillRect. Put up some sort of image first +so we can clear it away. Try both small areas and big areas, to give +credit to servers for optimizing small ones. + +Data: Pixels per second. + Breaking that down into large and small areas would probably not + be userful. + +GC Fields: None. + + +CopyArea +-------- +Putting up some image and then repeatedly copying from one part of it +to another would do the right thing and could look neat if done right. + +We probably want to see what happens when the source area is clipped, +as that as mentioned specifically in the protocol document. + +Data: Pixels per second. + +GC Fields: function (*) + plane-mask + subwindow-mode + graphics-exposures + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask + + +CopyPlane +--------- +Special case of CopyArea again. + + +PolyPoint +--------- +Draw lots of points. +Either start out with an image that's 50/50 black and white +(preferred) or draw enough points that some points will get drawn at +least twice (to test functions other than copy). + +Data: Points per second. + +GC fields: function (*) + plane-mask + foreground + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask + + +PolyLine +-------- +Circular test like there is now. +Try clipping at window boundaries? + +Data: Lines per second. + Pixels per second (is this valid - do lines that are twice as + long take twice as long to draw? Also, is it valid to compare + thin lines and fat lines?) + +GC fields: function (*) + plane-mask + line-width (*) + line-style (*) + cap-style (*) + join-style (*) + fill-style (*) + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile (*) + stipple (*) + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + dash-offset + dashes (*) + + +PolySegment +----------- +Just like PolyLine but lines don't have to be connected. Crosshatching? + +Data: Lines per second, pixels per second(?) + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + line-width + line-style + cap-style + fill-style + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile + stipple + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + dash-offset + dashes + + +PolyRectangle +------------- +Lots of five point PolyLines. Partly concentric ones would look nice; we +also need overlap for testing different functions. + +Data: Rectangles per second. + Pixels per second? (divide by perimeter) + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + line-width + line-style + join-style + fill-style + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile + stipple + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + dash-offset + dashes + + +PolyArc +------- +Overlapping concentric things (ripples) would look cool. +Is it possible to special-case circles? Test for this? + +Data: Arcs per second? If we had the same test each time this might + be OK. + Pixels per second? Finding the length of an arc could be + annoying. + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + line-width + line-style + cap-style + join-style + fill-style + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile + stipple + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + dash-offset + dashes + + +FillPoly +-------- +Use the same test as PolyLine? +Overlapping is a must to test functions. +Convex vs. Concave polygons. + +Data: Pixels per second, I guess. + Data for convex vs. concave could be interesting. + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + fill-style + fill-rule + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile + stipple + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + + +PolyFillRectangle +----------------- +Use same test as PolyRectangle? +Perhaps give FillPoly some of these too, see if it special cases them. +Fill Rectangle vs. Fill Poly for same size areas would be an + interesting comparison. + +Data: Pixels per second. + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + fill-style + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile + stipple + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + + +PolyFillArc +----------- +Use same test as PolyArc? + +Data: Pixels per second would be hard to compute, but what else is there? + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + fill-style + arc-mode + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile + stipple + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + + +PutImage +-------- + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + + +GetImage +-------- + +PolyText8 +--------- + +GC fields: function + plane-mask + fill-style + font + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask +Possibly foreground + background + tile + stipple + tile-stipple-x-origin + tile-stipple-y-origin + + +PolyText16 +---------- + +ImageText8 +---------- + +GC fields: plane-mask + foreground + background + font + subwindow-mode + clip-x-origin + clip-y-origin + clip-mask + +ImageText16 +--------- |