From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Redisplay problems? Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 05:55:52 +0200 Message-ID: <83txao1c8n.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87ppljg4ti.fsf@kanru-mozilla.corp.tpe1.mozilla.com> <5329C53B.3030008@gmx.at> <532ABA60.7000003@gmx.at> <83siqc7n87.fsf@gnu.org> <83a9ck6lzf.fsf@gnu.org> <83eh1v5y53.fsf@gnu.org> <83y5024r1w.fsf@gnu.org> <83ior6489a.fsf@gnu.org> <834n2q43os.fsf@gnu.org> <83vbv62gr7.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1395633367 7903 80.91.229.3 (24 Mar 2014 03:56:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 03:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, christian@defun.dk, cloos@jhcloos.com, kanru@kanru.info, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 24 04:56:16 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WRvzj-0000bS-C7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 04:56:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34357 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WRvzj-0007Po-26 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:56:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58315) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WRvzc-0007Pj-T9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:56:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WRvzY-00081Q-Q3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:56:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout27.012.net.il ([80.179.55.183]:48940) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WRvzY-00081J-IE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:56:04 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout27.012.net.il by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N2X00C008E5PC00@mtaout27.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 05:53:16 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N2X00FPN9GSZ400@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 05:53:16 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.183 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:170899 Archived-At: > From: Stefan > Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, christian@defun.dk, kanru@kanru.info, cloos@jhcloos.com, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 21:58:32 -0400 > > > I actually don't think we should be bothered about this at all. Why > > does it make sense to optimize the use case where a frame is > > deiconified? > > If you have 50 frames, 25 on one desktop and 25 on the other, whenever > you switch from one desktop to the other, 25 frames get deiconified and > the other 25 get iconified. I still don't see anything performance critical even in this scenario. A switch to a different desktop is not something one would do several times a second, and it's okay for it to take a second or so.