From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GDI+ take 3 Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 22:15:46 +0300 Message-ID: <83blnok3kt.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86h7xzc5ai.fsf@csic.es> <83v9m0g4yw.fsf@gnu.org> <83sgh4g3af.fsf@gnu.org> <83k12gfzxc.fsf@gnu.org> <83eesofyac.fsf@gnu.org> <83d088fwgt.fsf@gnu.org> <835ze0fqk2.fsf@gnu.org> <83sgh3eogs.fsf@gnu.org> <838sitazal.fsf@gnu.org> <86imhxufx9.fsf@csic.es> <83y2qsap7r.fsf@gnu.org> <83mu78kbwm.fsf@gnu.org> <86h7xgznqy.fsf@csic.es> <83h7xgk714.fsf@gnu.org> <83ftd0k6va.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="91463"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: juanjose.garciaripoll@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 18 21:29:35 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jPt9j-000NiY-Fi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 21:29:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60998 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jPt9i-0004mf-It for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 15:29:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39956) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jPt9A-0003pU-2f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 15:29:00 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34648) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jPt98-0007RP-2J; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 15:28:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4313 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jPswV-0007a3-48; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 15:15:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Juanma Barranquero on Sat, 18 Apr 2020 20:49:52 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:247242 Archived-At: > From: Juanma Barranquero > Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 20:49:52 +0200 > Cc: juanjose.garciaripoll@gmail.com, Emacs developers > > > Btw, one reason for latency could be GC. Juanma, if you turn on > > garbage-collection-messages, do you see that GC runs in the middle of > > an animation, when we stop the animation too early? > > There seems to be no clear correlation. > > I've tested a few times, and in the cases where the animation stops early, > the gc message is shown after the animation stops. In the occasions where > the animation runs correctly up to the end, there are gc messages while > the animation is running, but they don't seem to affect it. Thanks. I guess one theory eats dust.