Re: fb_imageblit semantic
flat view
From: Petr Vandrovec <hidden>
Date: 2003-03-14 10:53:02
On 14 Mar 03 at 11:40, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Petr Vandrovec wrote:quoted
On 14 Mar 03 at 10:22, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:quoted
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Petr Vandrovec wrote:quoted
Why do you pass image.depth == 16 (or 24 or 32) to fb_imageblit when logo image is in reality always 8bpp, as quick look at cfb_imageblit revealed?Should indeed be 8.quoted
Should I just assume that image.depth == 1 means that data are 1bpp with fgcol/bgcol valid, and all other depths mean 8bpp input?This was changed from 1 to 0 in James' latest tree.WTF? Color depth 0 means that whole picture is single-color, and imageblit degenerates to rectfill in such case. Please, either use 'depth' as source image color depth, or do not name it depth.It's 0 (expand [bf]gcol) to differentiate from 1 (copy monochrome). Splitting imageblit into separate routines for both operations would be trivial, though.
There is no such thing as copy monochrome if target is not monochrome,
you have to put palette somewhere. If you'll look at cfb_imageblit,
you'll find that there is already defined way to do that: code uses
artifically created 256 entry pseudopalette... If target is monochrome,
it just copies data. If target is not monochrome, it has somehow expand
data to fit to screen format. Nothing differs between font painting
and copying 1bpp bitmap to Xbpp display.
OK, so rule is that if depth=0, input is 1bpp with palette in bgcol/fgcol,
while if depth != 0, then palette is in info->pseudo_palette ?
Thanks,
Petr Vandrovec
vandrove@vc.cvut.cz
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open!
Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and
the chance of winning an Apple iPod:
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en