1. Re: XPM Library
Graeme wrote:
> title1.bmp - 23.3k
> title1.xpm - 22.7k
> title1.e (incbm) - 10.1k
>
>The simplicity of the test bitmap has been kind to XPM;
> It more than doubled the size of some I tried it with.
Graeme is entirely correct; the XPM format is *not* a memory efficient
method for graphics storage; I would heartily recommend that people use his
tools if they are in search of an efficient means of storing in-line
graphics data.
The XPM format is not something that was designed by myself; it's a format
that was developed and is still commonly used on the Unix platform for
encoding graphics. I've found XPMs useful as an intermediate format for two
reasons:
1. It gives a means of reading Unix XPM files.
2. It's sometimes more convenient to create and edit graphic images in a
text editor. The XPM format is well suited for this.
In both cases, that doesn't mean the files have to remain XPM files.
-- David Cuny
