Repository navigation
Conversation
Merged
Member
|
I took the liberty of rebasing it with the latest commit 65942a9. Strangely the Laplacian example is faster but the simpler blur is slower, so I wonder if further optimization is possible or if the circular buffer strategy is not a good idea? I wonder if you would be willing to implement a benchmark that runs in Node. That would help compare the possible approaches (even though Node/V8 is only one engine to consider). |
mbostock
requested changes
Jul 1, 2022
mbostock
left a comment
mbostock
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This doesn’t feel right to me. It lets you blur RGBA, yes, but you can’t e.g. just blur the R channel, and now blurh and asymmetric with blurv. We need to think through the interface here some more.
Member
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
demo https://observablehq.com/@d3/blur-stride-dev
The API will have to change: having the stride at the end after the optional ry is not the best solution.
There is no need to change blur1 to accept a stride parameter, since it is the same as using blur2 with width=stride, rx=0, ry=r. We can intercept this in the API if we want, for consistency.