Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!shelby!rutgers!news.cs.indiana.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!milo.mcs.anl.gov!atlantis.ees.anl.gov!korp
From: korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: OW as a PostScript X server...
Message-ID: <1990Nov14.012626.3685@mcs.anl.gov>
Date: 14 Nov 90 01:26:26 GMT
References: <9011131842.AA08663@islanders.>
Sender: news@mcs.anl.gov
Organization: Advanced Computer Application Center, Argonne National Laboratory
Lines: 29
Nntp-Posting-Host: atlantis.ees.anl.gov

In article <9011131842.AA08663@islanders.> fgreco@fis1138.GOVt.shearson.COM (Frank Greco) writes:
>> 
>> The technical problem with the X11/NeWS merged server is the following:
>> 
>> If you want to mix X and PostScript based imaging models (and I know people
>> who do, for very good reasons; each imaging model has much to offer the
>> application programmer), you have to synchronize the two connections.  This is 
>> more than a minor pain to an application programmer in this cicumstances
>> (and can be a non-trival performance problem; it basically involves putting
>> XSync calls and equivalent everywhere you care about order, which requires
>> a server round trip); and comes naturally if you are talking to a server 
>> over a single connection.
>
>	I don't get it.  Why is this a "technical problem" with the X/NeWS
>	merged server?  It is a concern wherever you want to mix imaging models.
>
>	I guess DEC wouldn't have the same problem mixing Display PostScript
>	and Xlib...;->

Actually I think they don't! I think it is accomplished by sending PS commands
as X protocol requests. Thus, no need to sync between the two imaging models.

[other ramblings deleted]

As I am not privy to source, exactly how is the DP extension to X implemented?
Are the X proto requests interpreted by the X-server and basically converted
to standard X calls? Is systemdict shared by all processes?

Peter