XyWin Flaws & Fixes

[Robert Holmgren 72050,3455]

Dear Mr. Frank:

There are some anomalies in your comments _re_ the XyWin screen font used in
Draft/Expanded modes. XyWin speed tests last winter repeated many times in
many different configurations demonstrated that remarkable speed optimization
has gone into Graphics (WZ) mode, but that XPL
cursor-and-text-manipulation-intensive test programs actually run *slower* in
Draft and Expanded modes (XP/WG) than in Graphics (WZ) mode.
 In fact, using default UI=1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,2,0,0 to keep the screen clear, my
tests showed XP/WG to be 9-12 times slower than WZ.
 Incredible! Originally I attributed this to the fact that "text modes"
(XP/WG) are just pretend, and are actually VIO graphics. Later I found that I
could speed everything up by restoring the CM and Prompt lines to BottomScreen
-- but Graphics mode was still 50% faster. In no case could I get XP/WG to run
faster -- in stark contrast to the DOS situation, where XP is greased
lightning, and WG ain't bad either compared to WZ.

I would not, myself, want anything but a monospaced font in XP/WG (I prefer
Courier). But regardless, the simplest way to harmonize the various needs of
users and program designers is to permit the optional display of embedded
(delta) codes, or an "expansion" of all underlying codes, while in Graphics
mode. Just let Graphics mode's display show all the codes, and stop formatting
the text. Should be *real simple* to do -- a subtractive rather than additive
thing (ignore code). Show the characters we've entered in the (monospace) font
we've designated in .DFL as our XP/WG font. The display is totally
unformatted. I mean, why not? You've got the bloody engine already, so just
use it for XP/WG! What do you lose thereby?