Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU!jim
From: jim@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Jim Fulton)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Resource consumption of window; was Re: twm reactions
Message-ID: <8806161604.AA26581@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Date: 16 Jun 88 16:04:00 GMT
References: <8806161518.AA01662@janeb.cs.wisc.edu>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 18


>> [note on using a single window for menus]
>
> I find this approach very depressing. I thought
> windows were supposed to be cheap in X! The whole idea of subwindows
> (at least in my mind) is that you don't have to muck around with the kind
> of thing described above.

There is a difference between cheap and free.  The current sample server is
geared towards being able to support up to [very roughly] on the order of a
thousand windows.  In an ideal world, windows would cost nothing; however, they
contain a lot of information (we're hoping to investigate ways of reducing the
memory consumption, but don't hold your breath too tightly).  The approach that
Guido describes is a valid solution for many types of menus.

It's all a matter of tradeoffs.


Jim Fulton