Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!SABER.COM!jimf
From: jimf@SABER.COM
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: XCreateImage & XPutImage Optimization
Message-ID: <9007251446.AA23510@lance>
Date: 25 Jul 90 14:46:20 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 25

|    Also are other parameters 
|    crucial in minimizing server overhead.  For example, are 32 bit scanline 
|    pads more efficient than 8 bit?
|
|The scanline pad and bits per pixel should also be chosen to match what
|the server wants.

Yep, but I've found that it's not too bad to put the image in any
format your program will be comfortable with and just feed that to the
server.  Even on gross architectures like the i386 machines this works
reasonably well and it makes your imaging program a LOT simpler since
it only has to deal with one image format.

For a case study, you might look at my xloadimage program (I think I'm
starting to sound like a preacher :-).  It always builds ZPixmap
format images (except for monochrome images) in MSByte order and feeds
them to the server that way.  Works pretty well.  Xloadimage is
available by anonymous ftp from expo.lcs.mit.edu in
/contrib/xloadimage.1.06.tar.Z.

Happy hacking,

jim frost
saber software
jimf@saber.com