[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: silent PC vs. emacs
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: silent PC vs. emacs |
Date: |
Mon, 04 Sep 2006 05:50:23 -0400 |
/* Install an asynchronous timer that processes Xt timeout events
every 0.1s. This is necessary because some widget sets use
timeouts internally, for example the LessTif menu bar, or the
Xaw3d scroll bar. When Xt timouts aren't processed, these
widgets don't behave normally. */
Would it be safe to turn this off if no X events have been received
for a certain time? I don't know.
If that is not safe, I think we are stuck with this, at least for now.
Changing this would probably take a lot of work and would need time
for debugging.
I still think it would be useful for someone to determine whether this
really has a substantial effect on laptop power drain rate.
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, (continued)
Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/09/04
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Jacobson, 2006/09/04
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/09/04
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Richard Stallman, 2006/09/06
Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Jan Djärv, 2006/09/03
Re: silent PC vs. emacs, T. V. Raman, 2006/09/02
Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Richard Stallman, 2006/09/03