On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 08:19:06PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 04:01:26PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote: > > As soon as you have acknowledged the recursive nature of the current > > update(), then something like this was bound to be needed. Well done for > > getting to grips with it all. > > I understand (now) that update() might be called recursively (again). > However, this does not serve any purpose but rather should be considered > a bug. >
I agree. A user typing faster than the UI doesn't want to see every drawing operation happen, with lyx lagging more and more behind. Just skipping any "stale" drawing operation and do the last one only should be better. Coarse screen updates when the cpu can't keep up is much better than detailed but lagging updates. Helge Hafting
