Storing images in memory instead of on disk.

[AnonymouX47]

This applies in three ways:

1. A DrawImage instance holds a reference to a PIL image instead of a filepath.
   • This way, the file doesn't have to be read from disk every time the image is to be drawn.
   • This will easily allow support for cases where an image is being processed and only currently exists in memory e.g PIL image objects and more.
   • Increases the speed of repeated image drawing.
   • Of course, this also comes at the cost of memory but i think the trade-off is worth it.
   • Makes the library usable in an environment where file writes are either not possible or not wanted (maybe on some servers or cloud-based systems).
   • The other points below are hinged upon this one.
2. Images downloaded from URLs are stored as PIL image objects instead of files.
   • This is dependent upon and shares the benefits/liabilities of (1.).
3. Frames of GIFs are stored as PIL images instead of files.
   • This is dependent upon and shares the benefits/liabilities of (1.).
   • I think this is good because the frames are only used once, so why take them from memory to disk, then back to memory.
   • Drastically increases speed.
   • Reduces amount of disk read/write.

Let me know what you think... I've already checked (and tested) and I'm sure 2 and 3 are possible.

[lainq]

Hmm. thats a good suggestion. I will take a look at the issue :)

[lainq]

Can we continue in #11

[AnonymouX47]

Ok, great.