The Interaction Window in DrRacket supports snips, picts etc., so it is
reasonable that is slower than a terminal.
But ... maybe it is possible to let the user choose a simpler interaction
window. One that only supports text?
As a feasibility experiment, is William Hatch's terminal faster than the
DrRacket interaction window?
https://github.com/willghatch/rackterm
/Jens Axel
2017-07-25 16:41 GMT+02:00 WarGrey Gyoudmon Ju <juzhenli...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:52 PM, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> Having little experience with Racket's drawing library, I can't speak to
>> how fast it is. I do recall someone saying it was (mostly) just a thin
>> layer over the native platform library, but even "thin layers" add some
>> latency. Nor do I have any clue as to how clever DrRacket is with its
>> drawing.
>>
>
> It's true for all other classes that implement the interface control<%>
> except the text% and text-field%, the editor infrastructure is completely
> implemented in Racket, there *are* some optimizations for speed by, such
> as, disabling ligatures. Sometimes I still hope there would be an
> alternative to the native text-field controller.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Racket Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
