emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Emacs design and architecture. How about copy-on-write?


From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: Emacs design and architecture. How about copy-on-write?
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 04:29:11 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0

On 21/09/2023 16:44, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 16:30:00 +0300
Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, acm@muc.de, incal@dataswamp.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev>

On 21/09/2023 16:00, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
You are basically proposing us to provide broken, incorrect, and
outdated display in some cases.  That won't fly, so it's a
non-starter.

If might prove an okay experience, if the "outdated" part is within
certain bounds. Like if the current buffer refreshes at 30/60fps, and
the mode-line at 10/20fps, for example.

That's not what was proposed.  The proposal was to do a
"quick-and-dirty" layout first, and use the results if the "accurate"
layout takes too long.

I think I've also commented on the potential problems in my first reply to that. But since it's just an abstract suggestion at this point, we can try and see the constructive aspects of it.

The quick-and-dirty layout can only be based
on ignoring changes in fonts and disregarding images and stuff like
that, so the screen lines will be wrong, and you will see them jump
and/or rearrange after some delay, which could be some seconds.  Some
browsers do that when they need to download images, and it always jars
me when that happens.  Usually, I also lose the place where I was
reading.

Some details on what the browsers really do:

- When the images are not downloaded yet, it's possible that the browser doesn't know how to lay out the page yet, and the time to download sad images is not guaranteed. So what you're describing is really the best-effort approach, which has been most noticeable in the past, over slow network connections (or in countries/locations with poor network coverage even nowadays). Either way, it's a best practice for the web page authors to include the dimensions of the images in the <img> tags -- when they are present, the layout can be done correctly even while the images are not downloaded yet.

- If a web page is complex enough, and I scroll it down after opening very quickly, it can happen so Firefox doesn't manage to render the page quickly enough, perhaps due to other load. When that happens, it shows the bottom of the page in a sort of blurry haze (which is replaced as soon as it's ready). Overall, it feels good enough usability-wise, because it doesn't look jerky or "blinky" or etc. And of course it's a rare occasion overall.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]