This message is more of a (tr)/(p)oll of the community. As cameras take higher and higher resolution pictures the demand on the stitching software becomes larger and larger. There have been a few several major improvements in this software throughout its history. Multi threading and GPU support are just to name a few.
64-bit processors are penetrating the market at a very high rate as 32 bit processors are no longer being designed for desktop use. I see in the forums that there are people compiling enblend for AMD64 branches of linux. This is very good because this allows for a much larger address space. I personally use windows xp pro X64 and would like to see a build for that. I would like to know what the communities idea of supporting a windows X64 build.
Another option that can increase memory limits in win32 applications is to make them large address aware <http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb147385.aspx> and <http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/Expand_Memory_of_32-bit_App_-_Microsoft_4GT-_6204.pdf>. on win32 bit platforms that raises the overall maximum memory to 3GB and on X64 platforms allows the program to utilize all 4GB that the 32 bit address space can reference. According to Microsoft making an application large address aware is a simple switch at link time.
With the emergence of 64 bit processors also has come SSE3. This allows for another 8 registers in the vector processing. I have not gotten intimate with the vector assembly in this project however if we introduce 64 bit compile flags this would be another good place to look for improvement.
I would like to work on this project so that there can be a way to make win X64 builds however I am pretty sure that it is going to take more than me to get this done. I am more than willing, if someone is interested in these same goals, to setup development sandboxes so that the compile and execution environment will be available to the people who need it. Please read over this post and leave feedback about how you in the community feel about these potential goals.
Also upon further inspection I see that the multithreading support that was added on to v1.3 and v2.0 is not available in 3.0. I personally think 3.0 should be updated to include this support. I would still like to see everyone else's reaction.
Log in to post a comment.
Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:
You seem to have CSS turned off.
Please don't fill out this field.