wow! my brain hurts.
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Alejandro Tejada via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> Hermann, your script version won the
> LiveCode Script speed contest! :-)
>
> I feel humbled and grateful that many of you
> have taken time to look at this. Although
Hermann, your script version won the
LiveCode Script speed contest! :-)
I feel humbled and grateful that many of you
have taken time to look at this. Although an
image dithering algorithm seems trivial an
barely useful, the fact is that in this thread,
we have pushed Livecode script almost to
it's
@Alejandro and Alex.
All that limit checking is not needed here. It is much faster,
especially for fast images,to do a few unneeded additions than
to do all these checks for each pixel.
I translated my js-function into LC Script, using Alejandro's
variable names and (inline) Alex's array creation
Hi Alex,
This is Amazing! :-D
Alex, your function saved another 34%
in the running time of this handler!
In retrospect, only now it seems very obvious
that merging two functions could save more
running time in this handler... but
I just keep wondering: How far can we go
merging functions to save
On 17/10/2017 00:21, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote:
Sorry about the horrible formatting on the last post... I'll try to find
my Forum password and post the modified version there
I haven't tackled the second half (i.e. the actual dithering bit yet -
maybe tomorrow).
I can trim a
On 16/10/2017 19:37, Alejandro Tejada via use-livecode wrote:
Hi Bob,
Bob Sneidar wrote:
I didn't post any code I don't think, but I will certainly
take some credit for having done so! ;-)
In fact, you are not late! :-D
But I am too late - the file is called "...Final Version ..." :-) :-)
Le
I didn't post any code I don't think, but I will certainly take some credit for
having done so! ;-)
Bob S
> On Oct 14, 2017, at 21:57 , Alejandro Tejada via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> This forum message contains the final version of this stack.
> It includes a Color version of th
Hi All,
This forum message contains the final version of this stack.
It includes a Color version of this algorithm.
https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&p=159173#p159173
Thanks again to Malte Brill, Richard Gaskin, Hermann Hoch, Mark Waddingham,
Peter Reid, Ben Rubinstein, Bob Sneidar
epending on the details of the loop body.
>
> If there was a "repeat for each sequenced..." form of loop in LC, any
> speed-up could be very beneficial even if the amount of speed-up was only
> 10 times faster!
>
> Cheers
>
> Peter
> --
> Peter Reid
> Lough
@Al.
For multiples of 1/8 (Atkinson) you need 8*256=2048 integers,
that is 11 Bit.
For multiples of 1/16 (Floyd-Steinberg) you need 16*256=4096
integers, that is 12 Bit.
In 2 chars = 16 Bit fit even multiples of 1/256.
No dither-algorithm uses such tiny diffusion-errors.
__
> Al wrote:
> Please, check this new handler in the forum and suggest how to
> make this faster and more precise.
I already gave you a method that is, with a 500x500 image, at
least 1000 (thousand) times faster than your script.
Of course this is not due my special skills but the ability of
javas
On 2017-10-12 19:35, Alejandro Tejada via use-livecode wrote:
Peter Read wrote:
One note of caution regarding the use of the "repeat for each" loop,
whilst you will get a loop iteration for every value in the collection
(fldhexa3 in your example), you are not guaranteed the order in
which they w
Peter Reid wrote:
> One note of caution regarding the use of the "repeat for each" loop,
> whilst you will get a loop iteration for every value in the collection
> (fldhexa3 in your example), you are not guaranteed the order in which
> they will occur.
Maybe I misunderstand, but are you thinking
That is correct Ben. It's not the repeat for each that is unreliable (probably
a bad word to use here) but it is arrays which do not retain the sequence of
key/values in the order they were put in.
To get around this, when possible use numbered keys, then:
put the keys of aMyArray into tKeyLi
on the details of the loop body.
If there was a "repeat for each sequenced..." form of loop in LC, any speed-up
could be very beneficial even if the amount of speed-up was only 10 times faster!
Cheers
Peter
--
Peter Reid
Loughborough, UK
On 9 Oct 2017, at 10:18am, use-livecode
f the amount of speed-up was only 10 times
faster!
Cheers
Peter
--
Peter Reid
Loughborough, UK
> On 9 Oct 2017, at 10:18am, use-livecode-requ...@lists.runrev.com wrote:
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 15:53:44 +0200
> From: Malte Pfaff-Brill
> To: use-livecode@lists.r
Hi Malte,
Malte Brill wrote:
> I already posted on the forums, but for completeness also here:
> a lot can be done by replacing repeat with with repeat for each where you
can.
>
> --repeat with i = 1 to the number of words of fldhexa3
> --put 00 & word i of fldhexa3 & word i of fldhexa3 &
Hi Al,
I already posted on the forums, but for completeness also here:
a lot can be done by replacing repeat with with repeat for each where you can.
--repeat with i = 1 to the number of words of fldhexa3
-- put 00 & word i of fldhexa3 & word i of fldhexa3 & word i of
fldhexa3 aft
I have posted a demo stack in the forums:
https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=29935
Have a nice weekend!
Al
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Alejandro Tejada
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am stuck trying to make this code for Bill Atkinson
> dithering algorithm much more faster.
> Any ways
19 matches
Mail list logo
