| 1 |
On 04/26 06:22, Floyd Anderson wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mi, 26 Apr 04:38:29 +0200 |
| 3 |
> tuxic@××××××.de wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On 04/25 07:38, Floyd Anderson wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > On Di, 25 Apr 17:47:22 +0200 |
| 6 |
> > > tuxic@××××××.de wrote: |
| 7 |
> > A few minutes ago I emerged xfce4-terminal and tried the |
| 8 |
> > cat-time-test of yesterday: 29 secondes with xfce-terminal |
| 9 |
> > and 5 seconds with urxvt. Hmmmm... |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > You have got the reversed results compared with mine... |
| 12 |
> Yes, my test (and probably my response to you) was too quick. I’m using |
| 13 |
> ‘URxvt*skipScroll: false’ here (cannot recall exactly why), which defaults |
| 14 |
> to ‘true’ normally. The same time-cat-test with `urxvt -ss` now finish |
| 15 |
> within a second instead of 25. Just another example that shows |
| 16 |
> comparing test results might be misleading, especially across multiple |
| 17 |
> computers. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> > What the heck slows down the output of the terminals on my |
| 20 |
> > Gentoo and only let urxvt shine? |
| 21 |
> That was one of my first thought when I was noticing the performance |
| 22 |
> difference between virtual terminal and terminal emulator(s). I happily |
| 23 |
> ended up by using rxvt-unicode after a relative short quest due to its low |
| 24 |
> resource requirements (can additionally decreased by using urxvtd), |
| 25 |
> extensibility, responsive and so on. And true colour — maybe some day; but |
| 26 |
> to be honest, 256 colours is more than enough for a terminal, at least for |
| 27 |
> me — even more as long as applications like Mutt, struggles by using only a |
| 28 |
> dozen of different colours. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> I’m sure the way answering this question will cost quite some time of |
| 31 |
> comparisons and/or investigations — too much vectors and special cases, too |
| 32 |
> much ‘too much’ for my taste (for a single feature). |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> One thing (as you can see by my test result above) is the configuration |
| 35 |
> itself — one nondescript parameter with a so noticeable impact. Also, with |
| 36 |
> different font sizes you’ll get different test results. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Other reasons may be hardware acceleration, the font handling/renderer |
| 39 |
> (anti-aliasing, sub-pixel addressing, hinting, colouring, combining |
| 40 |
> characters, buffering), graphical features (transparency, background image, |
| 41 |
> scroll bar). |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> And the main question that follows those considerations: Which of the |
| 44 |
> terminal appearance/behaviour is well documented and can be controlled by |
| 45 |
> the user? This were my next starting point at the quest for a new emulator |
| 46 |
> nowadays. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> > PS: I found XVilka before. That's why I asked for some experiences |
| 49 |
> > of other users.... :) |
| 50 |
> Yes, I thought as much because it is one of the top web search results by |
| 51 |
> now. I put it in for the case you haven’t recognised it and due to the |
| 52 |
> terminal overview and its still ongoing discussion. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
> -- |
| 56 |
> Regards, |
| 57 |
> floyd |
| 58 |
> |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
Hi FLoyd, |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
thanks for your words and explanations! :) |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
Yes, testing/comparing starts with syncing test conditions. |
| 66 |
I didn't know about that config item of urxvt you mentioned, too. |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
urxvt displays smaller fonts more nicely than sakura (for example) |
| 69 |
which may be point to different font rendering "engines" |
| 70 |
(nowadays everything seems to be a "system" et least - if |
| 71 |
not a complete "engin"...my mutt is a "mail composing engine |
| 72 |
with a great configuration sustem"...hahahha). |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
Sakura seems currently the only one handling some of vims |
| 75 |
colorschemes more correctly. |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
Hmmmm... |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
Will what happens GL as suggested in a previous post... |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
Keep scrolling!!1 :) |
| 82 |
Cheers |
| 83 |
Meino |
Archives