From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Can we go GTK-only? Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 18:47:23 +0200 Message-ID: <8360o8pisk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <24db2975-17ca-ad01-20c8-df12071fa89a@dancol.org> <4615E73A-19E2-4B79-9889-D3FA686DDDE6@raeburn.org> <11E61536-1345-4B81-999D-2E17F8B14C62@dancol.org> <83a8dkpl67.fsf@gnu.org> <32899811-83bb-e1f0-4f82-3e41846d7d0c@dancol.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477933041 26358 195.159.176.226 (31 Oct 2016 16:57:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:57:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: raeburn@raeburn.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Colascione Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 31 17:57:17 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c1FtO-0004cd-DK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 17:57:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37094 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c1FtR-0001Ie-38 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:57:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49042) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c1Fjv-0001F1-5a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:47:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c1Fjr-0003Zx-BZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:47:15 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:50531) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c1Fjr-0003Zs-8U; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:47:11 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3341 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1c1Fjq-0007YC-Em; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:47:10 -0400 In-reply-to: <32899811-83bb-e1f0-4f82-3e41846d7d0c@dancol.org> (message from Daniel Colascione on Mon, 31 Oct 2016 08:59:11 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:209028 Archived-At: > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, raeburn@raeburn.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Daniel Colascione > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 08:59:11 -0700 > > Of course there's no direct access to glyph matrices, but you can > imagine a scheme where both of the two parts above each have an idea of > what desired layout should be. That's exactly the part that needs to be carefully designed. It is nowhere near what we have now, because the current expression of "the idea of what the desired layout should be" is the glyph matrices, which in their present shape cannot be shared by several processes. I'm not even sure we could come up with a useful scheme that would allow such a division in a way that will let the communications between the two work efficiently. It remains to be shown that this is feasible.