Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!ico!attc!marbru
From: marbru@attc.UUCP (Martin Brunecky)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: PC X servers / backing store
Message-ID: <1213@attc.UUCP>
Date: 4 Mar 91 15:56:02 GMT
References: <9103032356.AA00215@devnull.Eng.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: marbru@auto-trol.UUCP (Martin Brunecky)
Organization: Auto-trol Technology, Denver
Lines: 35

In article <9103032356.AA00215@devnull.Eng.Sun.COM> dshr@eng.sun.COM (David Rosenthal) writes:
>> >
>> >Then their package is buggy.
>> This is absolutely untrue .....
>
>Sorry,  but backing store is not a feature like colors or visuals.
>It is a *hint* to the server ......
>
>The package in question,  and any other X program that *depends* on
>not getting exposure events from windows with backing store,  and any X
>program that *depends* on the save-under hint being observed,  is indeed
>buggy.  Its OK to work better if you don't get the exposure events; its
>not OK to break if you do.
>

     My $.01.  The word *depends* should be applied in two different
     contexts:

     1) Functionality:
        Application that *depends* on backing store to *function* is definitely
        buggy, as even the best implementation of backing store has the
        right to quit - even may be once in 1 million cases.

     2) Performance:
        Application that *depends* on backing store to *perform* acceptably
        is most likely correct. You don't run the Finite Element Analysis
        for F-119 on an 8086 PC. Similarly, you don't run an application
        which is a heavy user of backing store (or save-unders) on something
        that does not support it sufficiently.
  
-- 
=*= Opinions presented here are solely of my own and not those of Auto-trol =*=
Martin Brunecky                           {...}sunpeaks!auto-trol!marbru
(303) 252-2499                        (sometimes also:  marbru@auto-trol.COM )
Auto-trol Technology Corp. 12500 North Washington St., Denver, CO 80241-2404