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 05:33:23 +0200 Message-ID: <83lgx5p4zg.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> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477884865 28930 195.159.176.226 (31 Oct 2016 03:34:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 03:34:25 +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 04:34:15 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 1c13MB-0003t3-7W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 04:33:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:32960 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c13MD-0000aU-VV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:33:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50947) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c13LZ-0000aD-8t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:33:17 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c13LU-0000ih-Cu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:33:17 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42115) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c13LU-0000ib-9e; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:33:12 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2839 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1c13LT-0001Tl-04; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:33:11 -0400 In-reply-to: <11E61536-1345-4B81-999D-2E17F8B14C62@dancol.org> (message from Daniel Colascione on Sun, 30 Oct 2016 15:49:02 -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:209005 Archived-At: > From: Daniel Colascione > Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 15:49:02 -0700 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > The key insight there is that we shouldn't have redisplay *lock* the display matrix and render it. The lisp universe should send a *copy* of the matrix set, then go about its business. This way, redisplay can go display that copy and everything is decoupled. You turn the system into an Erlang like message passing environment. The glyph matrices are not exposed to Lisp, so there's no issue here to begin with.