quote:
Originally posted by rock3r
ok i give up...
I'm not.. I mean, if I have some time I'll cook something up (as a script) which does what you want... unless someone beats me to it...
quote:
Originally posted by rock3r
and i think (at least in languages i use that is) that string manipulation is not slower than image manipulation
but image
manipulation doesn't need to be done. PS: string manipulation is very slow and that goes for almost all languages. It has todo with how strings are handled in memory, especially if you need to search for substrings a hell of a lot memory reading and writing is done. The image manipulation involved in all this is not much more than writing something to memory only once...
quote:
Originally posted by rock3r
emos can also be 32bpp images, even if they are small, load and display lots of them is slower than adding the corresponding string entries in a listbox
displaying images need to be done anyways, there is otherwise no point in showing only shortcuts. If you can't remember shortcuts, you sure would not remember for what those shortcuts were in the first place.
Also, adding strings to a listbox
(which is also dead slow on its own) is something totally different than displaying images. You can't compare apples with peaches (or whatever the expression is), and that goes too for comparing a search on filenames (or sound names for that matter) and displaying the found
strings, with a searching on images (which you essentially will be doing) and displaying
images...
And
string manipulation is not adding stuff to a listbox but the actual searching, comparing, slicing up strings and iterating thru the list (over and over again), and the huge amount of memory reading and writing which is done by the CPU to achieve all this.
Write a bare bone program which displays something on screen and write something which searches 1 substring in a string using the basic building blocks of a program (with only memory read/write, for-loop and if-then-else statements). Then you'll see what I mean with 'a hell of a lot memory reading and writing'... as that is what the CPU must do...
---------------------------
quote:
Originally posted by rock3r
So, if i say that i think it can be a cpu-lightweight operation, i mean that: if somebody managed to do it, you can do it. It could be a hard result to achieve, that's another problem; but *it can be done*, and also in an efficient way. That's it
(....)
at least before saying me it can't try to do it!
my first response to this thread was:
quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
It is very well possible.
/ 
