[ALLY] Re: Amiga setup tip Re:(2)
From: carl:cybercraft at: 9-Aug-2000 18:50
On 09-Aug-00, [steve--shireman--maxonusa--com] wrote:
> Yes, the console locked up when hitting the close gadget, which I
> had submitted as a bug report this last weekend.
Well, good (sortof) to hear it's not just my Amiga that does it. (I'd
reported this bug a while back as well.)
> That was 0.9.9 or whatever that Beta version was. This morning
> before work, I just installed the Developer version which is later,
> but I haven't gone back to see if that problem is already fixed or
> not.
It wasn't fixed in the Amiga Experimental View release 0.10.18.1.1
released, hmm, three or so weeks ago now. Might've been updated
since then...
> As far as ILBM's, I do think they would provide lots of existing
> content for all platforms, to have that reader there, and give Rebol
> a great big edge over Java, for the graphics that could be used. (It
> takes time to develop new artwork! And I have tons of great GUI
> artwork in ILBM form) Of course, a converter could be written in
> Rebol, although I think the .jpeg decoder is written in asm for
> speed if I remember info from the past correctly.
Why can't you just convert your ILBMs to GIFs if you want to use them
with REBOL? JPGs and GIFs are the two most common image formats on
the Web by a /long/ margin. Adding native support for other image
formats, (and there's plenty of others besides ILBM), will just
increase the size of View to no great purpose. (Though there's a
good case for adding PNG support so REBOL has loss-less 24bit
support.)
That said, scripts written to load and save different file formats are
a different matter and do make sense. I've not absorbed what
REBOL-modules are yet, but perhaps they'd be the ideal way to add
such support?
> I suspect since most ILBM's (ANIMs would be nice too!) are
> inherently compressed but do not require a fat processor to use
> efficiently, that they could give excellent speed results.
They're fast compared to JPGs and GIFs, but then they aren't
compressed as much, which is important on the Net. (Those with
decent computers just ignore this discussion about image speeds,
okay?:) Then REBOL has its own native format, hasn't it? Anyone
care to comment on how it compares, compression-wise? (Assuming I'm
right that it exists, of course.:)
