Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!orca!toolbox!bobtl
From: bobtl@toolbox.WV.TEK.COM
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X double buffering
Keywords: double buffering
Message-ID: <4984@orca.WV.TEK.COM>
Date: 16 Oct 89 23:19:45 GMT
References: <170@med.Stanford.EDU> <181@wbcs.UUCP> <1929@bacchus.dec.com>
Sender: nobody@orca.WV.TEK.COM
Reply-To: bobtl@toolbox.WV.TEK.COM ()
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Wilsonville, OR
Lines: 19

In article <1929@bacchus.dec.com> klee@decwrl.dec.com writes:
>In article <170@med.Stanford.EDU>, rick@hanauma.stanford.edu (Richard
>Ottolini) writes:

>The advantage of this approach is that, on most systems,
>changing the colormap is much faster than copying pixmaps.

Unless the window manager gets in the way.  Is the mechanism in ICCCM
fast enough for this?  I am asking because I have never seen this done
in a truly compliant application with a truly compliant window manager.

Whatever truly compliant means.

>Ken Lee
>DEC Western Software Laboratory, Palo Alto, Calif.
>Internet: klee@decwrl.dec.com
>uucp: uunet!decwrl!klee

Bob Toole