Are you using the QT version? The X11 version still feels snappier for me.
-á. On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 13:01, Sam Liddicott <s...@liddicott.com> wrote: > In fact as I type I feel such gratitude I have to say a double thank-you. > > Sam > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Sam Liddicott <s...@liddicott.com> wrote: >> >> Thanks for this kind offer. >> >> I'm trying not to blush too hard a I write this. I decided to update from >> SVN and re-compile and it's like a new world! The longest delay is now 2 >> seconds. This is a great relief. >> >> Thanks to all those who made it so much faster. >> >> Sam >> >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Massimiliano Gubinelli >> <m.gubine...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sam, >>> do you think you can handle me the document (or a faked version) for me >>> to test and perform some profiling onto. In my opinion large delays should >>> not happen unless the document requires intrinsically a whole new >>> typesetting at each small change, for example when there are no line or page >>> breaks. So I would tend to think that it is some misbehaviour of TeXmacs. It >>> could also due to the still not perfect handling of the keyboard events in >>> the Qt port. Have you tried with the X11 version? >>> >>> Best >>> max >>> >>> >>> >>> On 21 nov. 2011, at 11:19, Sam Liddicott wrote: >>> >>> > I think texmacs is the best text editing system ever. The macro system >>> > with direct editing of parameters makes it amazing. >>> > >>> > But I am finding it very hard to use on a daily basis. >>> > >>> > My main work document is 150 pages and takes 30 seconds to process >>> > pressing ENTER or deleting a blank paragraph in body text near the >>> > beginning >>> > of the document and 12 seconds at the end of the document. I have one >>> > image, >>> > and 50 of the pages are the inclusion of another TeXmacs document. >>> > >>> > This occurs with or without my literate programming extensions loaded; >>> > it occurs in papyrus mode or paper mode; and with sloppy algorithm. >>> > >>> > I came from LyX which did not attempt typesetting as such at edit time, >>> > I wonder if TeXmacs might be induced to perform in a more light-hearted >>> > way >>> > at edit time. >>> > >>> > Apart from the sloppy algorithm, are there any other tips which might >>> > help me? >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Texmacs-dev mailing list >>> > Texmacs-dev@gnu.org >>> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Texmacs-dev mailing list >>> Texmacs-dev@gnu.org >>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Texmacs-dev mailing list > Texmacs-dev@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev > > _______________________________________________ Texmacs-dev mailing list Texmacs-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
