[
Date Prev
][
Date Next
][
Thread Prev
][
Thread Next
][
Date Index
][
Thread Index
]
[MiNT] XaAES vs N.AES (was: Re: XAAES slow?)
To
:
mint@fishpool.com
Subject
: [MiNT] XaAES vs N.AES (was: Re: XAAES slow?)
From
: Standa Opichal <
opichals@seznam.cz
>
Date
: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 11:41:48 -0400
Delivered-to
:
fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
In-reply-to
: <42B89D84.6030108@chello.nl>
List-help
: <
mailto:ecartis@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=help
>
List-id
: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
List-unsubscribe
: <
mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=unsubscribe
>
References
: <42B09A61.9020204@yahoo.fr> <1118887948.12057.11.camel@linuxbox> <42B18304.3030406@yahoo.fr> <1118934446.15790.7.camel@linuxbox> <42B1AEE7.3010707@yahoo.fr> <1119105225.15790.70.camel@linuxbox> <20050619015454.t7xyf5g6awisk0o4@coolrunningco
Sender
:
mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
User-agent
: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
Hi!
Was that confirmed that the XaAES wind_calc() caching improved/fixed the
situation that is shown in the videos made by Zorro? Ie. N.AES vs XaAES
window resize/redraw performance differences.
Regards STanda
Prev by Date:
[MiNT] usage of wind_calc()
Next by Date:
Re: [MiNT] usage of wind_calc()
Previous by thread:
Re: [MiNT] Re[3]: usage of wind_calc()
Next by thread:
Re: [MiNT] wind_get( WF_WORKXYWH) buggy?
Index(es):
Date
Thread