Re: GTK scroll bar question

[Dmitry Antipov <dmantipov@yandex.ru>]

On 07/31/2014 03:53 PM, Jan Djärv wrote:

> We want to get rid of those as they are a performance hit.

Less widgets is not necessary means more performance.

> The first Gtk+ version I made did not use handle_one_xevent, but it was
> decided that the code in handle_one_xevent should be reused.  So it is
> a no-brainer to replace it, it is just a lot of work.
>
> The reason is that we have a lot of code in other places to handle timers
> and other things (the whole xg_select.c file for example) that only comes
> from not running the Gtk+ event loop.

It just confirms that Emacs is not a first-class Gtk+ citizen and will always
have OS- and so window system-specific code.

> It is true that Cairo don't use pixmaps

What do you mean about "don't use"?

* xlib: Uses the Xlib interface to the X Window System. This backend can target
   Windows or Pixmaps. The Render extension is used if available, but is not required.

(http://cairographics.org/backends).

>> In particular, this will require
>> new redisplay interface to replace x_redisplay_interface
>
> No it will not.

Get your favorite function from x_redisplay_interface and try to redesign
it by using only Gtk+ and Cairo interfaces.  Do not assume that Gtk+ is
backed by X, so no way to access underlying Display, Window, GC, etc.
I'm pretty sure you eventually finish with gtkterm.c :-).

> From what was contained in the Gtk+ port only, you now distribute to three files,
> and enlarge a struct for no good reason.  That is not elegant IMHO.

Pointers to Gtk+ widgets are OK in x_output, which is actually a part of frame.
So I don't see why it's so bad for scroll bars, especially if it's going to
replace _larger_ data structure with non-zero maintenance cost.

>> With all possible respect, we can't direct each other to do or not to do
>> something.  And we shouldn't, isn't it?
>
>
> So when you can checkin to the Emacs tree, you feel you are in your right to
> break code and generally change it so that the people that try to maintain
> it can't recognize anymore?

Please re-read above. I mean "do", which is not always the same as "checkin".

Dmitry