Hi David, > I see the problem, but I think that solution is unwise as it leaves > a redundant file in the user's home directory, which they may fear > removing.
Oh, I see. I didn’t know that file could be safely removed. > This script then has to be maintained, and it also makes it less obvious > how to adjust the process for any differences between systems. I think > the process is mysterious enough without hiding it any more Right. I forgot that the steps for Fedora are slightly different. Out of curiosity, do Mac and Windows users have to stick to Frescobaldi for Point & Click? They’re not even mentioned in the Usage Manual. > Debian 10/buster with Xpdf and emacs running on a 2000-vintage > Pentium III at 650MHz in 512MB memory took less than a second to > open the source at the first click, and thereafter serviced each > click in 0.5 secs, just so long as the new target position is in > the displayed window Wow, that’s old hardware! In my Asus laptop from 2017, Atom takes a while to open the first time. After that, each click takes around 0.5 secs or less I would say. It’s not something of great concern to me, but it’s noticeable, especially after being used to Frescobaldi’s immediate reposition of the cursor. Perhaps it has to do with Atom (not the lightest editor around). Were Atom not so pleasing to the eye, I would probably try with another one to compare speed ;-). www.martinrinconbotero.com On 2. Nov 2020, 03:28 +0100, lilypond-user@gnu.org, wrote: > > I see the problem, but I think that solution is unwise as it leaves > a redundant file in the user's home directory, which they may fear > removing.
