Xref: utzoo comp.emacs:8105 comp.windows.x:20875
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!shurr
From: shurr@cbnews.ATT.COM (Larry A. Shurr)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs,comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Emacs refresh speed under X on Sparcstation
Message-ID: <15426@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 10 Apr 90 17:19:31 GMT
References: <1510@viewlog.UUCP>
Reply-To: shurr@cbnews.ATT.COM (Larry A. Shurr,20650,cb,9a110,6148605851)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, OH (actually an AGS consultant)
Lines: 21

In article <1510@viewlog.UUCP> josh@viewlog.UUCP (Josh Marantz) writes:
}I have Gnu Emacs 18.55 running on my Sparc under SunOS 4.0.3, using X11R4.
}The refresh speed is excellent when paging forward and backward.  But when
}doing complex operations, such as splitting windows, partial scrolls, and
}big kills and copies, sometimes the display seems non-optimal.  It seems
}like it would be faster on the Sparc to do a complete repaint rather than
}do scroll-region (presumably through XCopyArea).  How do I tell the Emacs
}redisplay algorithm that these scrolls are very costly?

Very likely, you can tell Emacs that repaints are cheaper by using
stty to tell it you are running at a high baud rate eg: "stty 38400"

Of course you're fibbing because you have no baud rate at all on the
Sun display, but who cares?  This is what I did on an AT&T 6386.

regards, Larry
-- 
Signed: Larry A. Shurr (cbnmva!las@att.ATT.COM or att!cbnmva!las)
My psuedo-Burma Shave .signature has served me long and well and has been
retired.  A new .signature is now under consideration.
This posting reflects my opinions, not those of AGS or AT&T, but you knew that)