GDI/GDI+ creating paths
Evan Stade
estade at gmail.com
Tue Jun 26 13:46:37 CDT 2007
Hi,
I was talking with Julliard about the implementation of paths in GDI+.
He suggested that the right way to do it was to build paths directly
(i.e. not calling into GDI). I'm not sure why calling into GDI is
undesirable. There are several reasons I'd like to use GDI paths:
* GDI and GDI+ paths seem to behave exactly the same way
* this implementation of GDI+ calls into GDI for drawing, so it seems
natural to rely on GDI to create paths as well.
* unless we take rendering completely out of the hands of GDI, we need
GDI to draw paths for us because of line joins. It seems strange to
me to draw shapes and draw paths with GDI, but not to create paths
with GDI.
* path.c in gdi32 is 2000 lines, and re-implementing it seems overkill
I don't see any drawbacks of calling into GDI to make paths, other
than a slight performance decrease introduced by an extra level of
indirection. Can anyone suggest another reason why this approach is
flawed?
--
Evan Stade
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list