Re: ha ha, only serious

ms> I didn't honestly mean to suggest this as a good idea. You've worked in redisplay recently. Doesn't _anything_ sound like a good idea? :-þ I suspect that's what Jamie meant, too. He's sounding a little frustrated ("the single biggest bug") with the suboptimization of redisplay of unchanged windows on Expose events (which you can get literally thousands of with modern window managers that allow opaque moves). ms> In particular, I doubt it would be easy to make it do TTY ms> output, multi-device display, or specifier-like customization. It's not clear to me that TTY or specifiers are actual problems, if we treat KHTML as a back-end to redisplay.c a la Bill P's suggestion. We'd have to rewrite redisplay-tty.c, I'm sure, but I doubt it would be any harder to maintain than the current version. I'm more worried about hooking up things like extents to display events, but maybe that's not so hard, either. And if KHTML actually doesn't require a toolkit, then we'd have to supply it with our own event loop anyway. On the other hand, I note that the message you cite names 6 presumably full-time developers. That's a lot of manpower compared to what we have available, so there could be a fair amount of effort hidden in the "thin compatibility layer" by XEmacs Project standards. -- Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Ask not how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software.