Re: Emacs on OS X development

[Pavlo Martynenko <pavelmart@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2345 bytes --]


On 21 Jul 2012, at 19:53, chad wrote:

> If this video purports to show anything except that the mac port has gui animations added to it, then I don't see it (the gui animations themselves are a source of problems, as has been reported here twice).

The main purpose is to show better scrolling and buffer switching with two fingers. "Look and feel" and animation. Nothing more.

> Assuming that by `ugly' you mean 'lacks gui animations', I wonder if you can provide a bug report or video describing problems with C-g, font rendering, modifier keys, multiprocessing, or networking?

I meant it looks ugly. Even animations is not important. Mac Port looks native, while NS port looks and behaves alien to OS X. It is like big step backward in time.



NS port is on the left where the font is narrow and faint. Same font but different frame height. And where is the true brown?

As for modifier keys, multiprocessing and network I'd like to switch to NS port for a while, and inform about them, if there is one (I hope there is none now). But I will terribly miss nice smooth scrolling and buffer switching with two fingers. Instead I'l be happy to provide any information about Mac Port.

I applied Mac Port patch on trunk (just monkey patching). But the resulting Emacs has a really bad response on keyboard entry and mouse/trackpad.

Btw. Mac Port has more great features. Triple tap on selected word calls dictionary. 



And here is difference in flymake highlighting. Startup configs are the same.




On 23 Jul 2012, at 21:57, Ted Zlatanov wrote:

> Do you compile your own binaries, for instance?

Yes.

> Do you have problems with some specific network connections?

Yes in slow and bad networks. It looks like after loosing some packets comes problem with C-g, and the only way was to killall -9 Emacs.

> As far as "ugly" I have no opinion, and haven't noticed font issues or
> other visual problems. The NS port's functionality has been all right
> for me, especially keyboard entry, multiprocessing, and networking.

Did you noticed that NS port is just fine only for those who never tried Mac Port, and those who are not using OS X every day?

I have used NS port today, and I have to agree it response very well and looks better than two month ago but it still ugly.

	Pavlo





[-- Attachment #2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 3704 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.2: Screen Shot 2012-07-24 at 12.17.54.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 406763 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.3: Screen Shot 2012-07-24 at 12.19.31.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 97494 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.4: Screen Shot 2012-07-24 at 13.16.21.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 28234 bytes --]