D GUI Framework (responsive grid teaser)

Manu turkeyman at gmail.com
Sun May 26 16:39:53 UTC 2019

On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 4:10 AM NaN via Digitalmars-d-announce
<digitalmars-d-announce at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, 25 May 2019 at 23:23:31 UTC, Ethan wrote:
> > On Sunday, 19 May 2019 at 21:01:33 UTC, Robert M. Münch wrote:
> >>
> >> Browsers are actually doing quite well with simple 2D graphics
> >> today.
> >
> > Browsers have been rendering that on GPU for years.
> Just because (for example) Chrome supports GPU rendering doesn't
> mean every device it runs on does too. For example...
> Open an SVG in your browser, take a screenshot and zoom in on an
> almost vertical / horizontal edge, EG..
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Ghostscript_Tiger.svg
> If you look for an almost vertical or almost horizontal line and
> check whether the antialiasing is stepped or smooth. GPU
> typically maxes out at 16x for path rendering, CPU you generally
> get 256x analytical.

What? ... this thread is bizarre.

Why would a high quality SVG renderer decide to limit to 16x AA? Are
you suggesting that they use hardware super-sampling to render the
Why would you use SSAA to render an SVG that way?
I can't speak for their implementation, which you can only possible
speculate upon if you read the source code... but I would; for each
pixel, calculate the distance from the line, and use that as the
falloff value relative to the line weighting property.

How is the web browser's SVG renderer even relevant? I have absolutely
no idea how this 'example' (or almost anything in this thread) could
be tied to the point I made way back at the start before it went way
off the rails. Just stop, it's killing me.

More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce mailing list