Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!boulder!stan!ninja!toml From: toml@ninja.Solbourne.COM (Tom LaStrange) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: "fixed" vtwm Message-ID: <1990Aug25.210434.9561@Solbourne.COM> Date: 25 Aug 90 21:04:34 GMT References: Sender: news@Solbourne.COM Distribution: comp Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc. Lines: 30 From article , by thoth@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Gilligan): > I don't have a patch for the xmh simplemenu problem and I have a > sneaking suspicion that it might be Xmh's fault. > Nope, it's a bug in vtwm. > Vtwm IS slower than twm. It has more data to keep track of. The > main thing that bothers me is the time it takes our servers to move > all the windows, and I have to make empty "streets" to "drive" down > when I'm moving from workspace to workspace because the cost of expose > events. Even if you don't expose windows you can slow your machine > down with sheer numbers. An xpostit farm off in the corner can make a > REAL difference. Once the above bug is fixed, your response will even be slower. Sometime next week (8/27-8/31) you can try a new virtual desktop twm that will have much better performance when panning the desktop. It is modeled after the virtual desktop in swm and includes the ability to drag windows into and out of the panner. What will this new version be called? How about tvtwm? It is a new version, none of the code came from vtwm. -- Tom LaStrange Solbourne Computer Inc. ARPA: toml@Solbourne.COM 1900 Pike Rd. UUCP: ...!{boulder,sun}!stan!toml Longmont, CO 80501