<div dir="ltr">I understand there's a "bug" in neod which causes cpu usage to shoot up (well, not exactly a bug.. the accelerometers spew out too much data? 200 times per second? ) .. possibly, we could start there?<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Tilman Baumann <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tilman@baumann.name">tilman@baumann.name</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
sparky mat wrote:<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Tilman Baumann <<a href="mailto:tilman@baumann.name" target="_blank">tilman@baumann.name</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tilman@baumann.name" target="_blank">tilman@baumann.name</a>>> wrote:<br>
X as a screen multiplexer is not too bad. Why bother?<br>
<br>
<br>
I gathered from this thread that its GTK+ that could use some optimizations? Esp. image caching?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Yea, there seems to be room for optimisation. EFL does it supposedly better.<br>
The x11 protocol has some ugly pitfalls.<br>
<br>
But i don't think render performance makes such a big difference. Startup time and overall performance seems more important to me.<br>
<br>
I think before we optimize render performance by throwing X away, we have plenty of opportunities to make big improvements somewhere else with bigger impact and lesser drawback.<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
Drucken Sie diese Mail bitte nur auf Recyclingpapier aus.<br>
Please print this mail only on recycled paper.<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>