On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Daniel Prager <daniel.a.pra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 2:10 AM, WarGrey Gyoudmon Ju < > juzhenli...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello, I think the main reason that pict is faster than 2htdp/image is, >> the pict is implemented with struct while the 2htdp/image is implemented >> with class, the speed of rendering is just as fast/slow as each other, but >> manipulation on class is much heavier than on struct when combining large >> numbers of shapes. Maybe you want to check the code of `table` in pict-lib, >> it is a good example to place shapes into grids in a functional way. >> > > Interesting. I'd also note that unlike pict 2htdp/image doesn't provide a > way to draw direct to dc, necessitating going via bitmaps when using it in > conjunction with racket/gui. > Actually, this is not the case, every 2htdp/image shape is a subclass of snip%(see the `draw` method of snip%), though you have to compute another 9 arguments... I remembered some points that old conversations had suggested: 1. 2htdp/image is not efficient enough for building real world gui application, racket/draw should be used instead. 2. When drawing large amount of shapes, the cost of getting into and out the drawing context is critical. 3. typed racket is helpful even for real time rendering, say, perlin noise, almost as fast as java, (but I did not see the direct link between your work and real time rendering.) Good luck for you. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
