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