home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #18 / NN_1992_18.iso / spool / comp / sys / atari / st / 12511 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-08-18  |  1.4 KB
  1. Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!uqcspe!cs.uq.oz.au!warwick
  2. From: warwick@cs.uq.oz.au (Warwick Allison)
  3. Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
  4. Subject: Re: Utterly bizarre idea for Atari
  5. Message-ID: <9880@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
  6. Date: 19 Aug 92 02:57:18 GMT
  7. References: <1992Aug17.233720.6633@fcom.cc.utah.edu> <1992Aug18.110632.426@ulrik.uio.no> <ADRIAN.92Aug18142018@percy.robots.ox.ac.uk>
  8. Sender: news@cs.uq.oz.au
  9. Reply-To: warwick@cs.uq.oz.au
  10. Lines: 24
  11.  
  12. adrian@robots.ox.ac.uk (Adrian Cox) writes:
  13.  
  14. >What I have not heard of is
  15. >a parallel architecture good for interactive programs such as word
  16. >processors and art packages.
  17.  
  18. While "performance" is a moot point for straight wordprocessors, art packages
  19. and DTP programs could achieve significant benefits from vectorization.  The
  20. bezier curve algorithm is trivially vectorizable, for example, and probably
  21. consumes the greatest amount of CPU time in DTP packages (when coupled to
  22. drawing font elements, etc).
  23.  
  24. However, any multitasking environment will benefit from multi-processing,
  25. and this was the original poster point, I believe (since only a two-processor
  26. system was referred to - useless for vectorization).
  27.  
  28.  
  29. --
  30. Warwick
  31. --
  32.   _-_|\      warwick@cs.uq.oz.au            /Disclaimer:
  33.  /     * <-- Computer Science Department,  /  
  34.  \_.-._/     University of Queensland,    /      void (if removed)
  35.       v      Brisbane, Australia.        /  
  36.