From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan_Dj=E4rv?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs and Gnome Canvas Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:42:00 +0200 Message-ID: <4C405398.4010203@swipnet.se> References: <4C3CD120.4040905@swipnet.se> <5A91499A-0470-43FD-9F48-560CEAD3424C@mit.edu> <83wrsyr068.fsf@gnu.org> <83iq4hhjww.fsf@gnu.org> <87sk3lbvv0.fsf@telefonica.net> <83hbk1grnq.fsf@gnu.org> <4C3EBCDC.8050709@swipnet.se> <83d3upgmwj.fsf@gnu.org> <4C3ECB4C.6050208@swipnet.se> <83aaptgly1.fsf@gnu.org> <4C3ED4F9.4080603@swipnet.se> <83630hgi0r.fsf@gnu.org> <4C3EE8D6.3020607@swipnet.se> <8339vlgcax.fsf@gnu.org> <87fwzkbzg8.fsf@telefonica.net> <877hkwag6y.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4C400B3C.4000203@swipnet.se> <83iq4fg3eb.fsf@gnu.org> <83fwzjg17j.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279284183 23018 80.91.229.12 (16 Jul 2010 12:43:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:43:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, cyd@stupidchicken.com, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 16 14:43:01 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OZkFo-0005AP-7D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:43:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58698 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OZkFn-0006tV-Pr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:42:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46266 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OZkEx-0006Kh-6l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:42:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OZkEw-0004yU-7m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:42:07 -0400 Original-Received: from smtprelay-h21.telenor.se ([195.54.99.196]:51653) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OZkEt-0004y1-RX; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:42:04 -0400 Original-Received: from ipb2.telenor.se (ipb2.telenor.se [195.54.127.165]) by smtprelay-h21.telenor.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B703EA3E5; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:42:02 +0200 (CEST) X-SENDER-IP: [85.225.45.35] X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Aq1BAHfwP0xV4S0jPGdsb2JhbACHcJd4DAEBAQE1Lb4yhSQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,214,1278280800"; d="scan'208";a="105164320" Original-Received: from c-232de155.25-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se (HELO coolsville.localdomain) ([85.225.45.35]) by ipb2.telenor.se with ESMTP; 16 Jul 2010 14:42:01 +0200 Original-Received: from [172.20.199.13] (zeplin [172.20.199.13]) by coolsville.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7320A7FA05A; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:42:01 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; sv-SE; rv:1.9.2.4) Gecko/20100608 Thunderbird/3.1 In-Reply-To: <83fwzjg17j.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:127431 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii skrev 2010-07-16 12.39: >> Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:15:25 +0900 >> From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu > >> For example, it does not accept multiple rectangles for exposed area >> that is necessary for minimal redrawing. > > Don't we get a single expose event for each exposed rectangular area? > If we do, what would be the gain from processing multiple rectangles > at once? There is an X extension for that, DAMAGE. But if that is not used, you would get just one rectangle. Since the extension exist and programs use it, I assume people found that it gave and advantage. > >> It also reuses functions primarily designed for drawing during >> redisplay and that does not necessarily efficient for exposure >> handing. > > Are you talking about draw_glyphs? If so, how is it biased in favor > of redisplay, and what would be a more efficient way of drawing glyphs > in a specified area of the display than what draw_glyphs does? If you for example have double buffer, you can split expose from update display. When an expose comes, you just copy the area from the backing store to the window. But for updating the display, you draw normally, but to the backing store. Then when you are done, you copy it to the window. But I don't think optimizing for expose is worth it. Expose iis very rare compared to update. Jan D.