U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Status & Roadmap

Authors & License

Funding Ultimate++

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Should we double-buffer by default?

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Return to the default flat view

Create a new topic

Submit Reply

Re: Should we double-buffer by default? [message #4055 is a reply to message #4053]

Tue, 18 July 2006 15:56

unodgs is currently offline

unodgs
Messages: 1367
Registered: November 2005
Location: Poland

Ultimate Contributor

luzr wrote on Tue, 18 July 2006 09:23

Now reading Qt docs, since Qt4.0 they do doublebuffering as the only option. Should not we too? (OK, this whole message is for Daniel in the first place... Wink

Wink

Thank you Mirek Wink

Wink

Indeed, to answer if double-buffering should be used as default is not easy. Generaly idea is great and it solves many corner issues with painting.

The main problem with double-buffering is speed of drawing, which is depended mainly on graphics card and the screen resolution. Unofrtunately I always had feeling that apps that are working in full screen in double-buffering mode are less responsive (at least when win32 api (gdi) is used) than "classical" painted ones (even if cpu has 1ghz and modern gfx card like gf4 were used).

I will try your new code today evening and then I'll be able to say more. I think that we should make tests in apps working in maximized modes in resolutions 1024x768 and 1280x1024. In smaller windows there should not be any noticeable difference.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

[Message index]

		Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 15:23
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 15:31
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: unodgs on Tue, 18 July 2006 15:56
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 16:36
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: unodgs on Tue, 18 July 2006 23:43
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 23:57
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 00:42
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 08:09
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 08:34
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 09:01
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 10:09
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 11:01
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 11:18
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 11:47
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 16:25
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 16:43
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: fudadmin on Wed, 19 July 2006 17:59
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 18:56
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: fudadmin on Wed, 19 July 2006 19:23
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 21:14
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: fudadmin on Fri, 21 July 2006 04:52
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Fri, 21 July 2006 10:44
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mirek on Fri, 21 July 2006 12:10
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: fudadmin on Wed, 19 July 2006 19:38
		Re: Should we double-buffer by default? By: mr_ped on Wed, 19 July 2006 15:04

Previous Topic:	let's discuss new Draw principles and problems...
Next Topic:	A list of SQL dialects to support (eventually)..

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

PDF

]

Current Time: Mon Jun 09 08:38:24 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04561 seconds