4 ms·
It does have a cost. But maybe the cost isn’t worth it sometimes. I’ll take the 4K screen please. I’m willing to pay for those pixels. But animations for no re
by guidoism 3y ago
It does have a cost. But maybe the cost isn’t worth it sometimes. I’ll take the 4K screen please. I’m willing to pay for those pixels.
But animations for no reason other than to make it seem like waiting for something is less of a chore? Nope.
Unicode is something I’m willing to pay for.
But we should be able to draw the glyphs on the screen in single-digit ms like we did in 1981. Yes more pixels and more glyphs but it’s possible just not a priority.
- dale_glass 3y ago> But we should be able to draw the glyphs on the screen in single-digit ms like we did in 1981. Yes more pixels and more glyphs but it’s possible just not a priority. In 1981 we drew fixed-width bitmap fonts at low resolution. In 2023, a font is a complex program that creates a vectorial shape, which is carefully adjusted to the display device it's being rendered on for optimal graphical results and antialiasing. That said, performance isn't bad at all. Just resize the comment field back and forth while having a bunch of text within, and you'll see that text rendering performance is perfectly fine. I see no slowness.