Re: Using the ImageMagick backend seems to leak memory

[Miles Bader]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
>  > My impression is that in general, ImageMagick does not aim at memory
>  > efficiency (that's why I don't want to use its libraries for my own
>  > image I/O needs, event though doing so would be pretty convenient).
>  > I would have though it's OK for small/medium images though.
>
> I believe disagreement on this point was a (minor) reason why the
> GraphicsMagick project forked off.  Anyway, GraphicsMagick *does* aim
> at efficiency, both in time and space.

Sadly GraphicsMagick seems to have achieved this partly by dropping some
important features (e.g. floating-point pixel support...).

Probabably not relevant for Emacs I suppose.

What _I_ want, though, is a way to use one of these toolkits lower-level
way that allows me to do progressive/partial I/O.  Unfortunately it
seems that most unified image-handling toolkits sort of ignore anything
but whole-image I/O...

-Miles

-- 
Generous, adj. Originally this word meant noble by birth and was rightly
applied to a great multitude of persons. It now means noble by nature and is
taking a bit of a rest.