[jeffdewe@gmail.com: Dillo]
Hi, just one more practical explanation of the advances the more ressource friendly fltk2 has. BTW: fltk2 does not necessarily depend on GL. Imagine you have a device with limited ressources. Running a browser bigger than dillo might be possible. Perhaps even a bigger loading time might be ok in some situations. For example if you hve only gprs to connect to the internet, then loading of many pages takes ages anyway. But in case of multitasking there is really a harder limit. If you have multiple applications running which are a bit bigger, then you really have problems when you start a fat browser. Here is an example: Just some days after I got my freerunner I started a long bicycle trip and had not find time to install dillo. On one of the first evenings I visited one or two pages. That was not so nice but bearable with the default browser really because I was not surfing very much (of course having dillo is much better). Some days later, I was abroad and I found one wifi hotspot. I had more applications open (at least my mapping program (with a hotspot list loaded) Starting the default browser has frozen the system. That is completely unbearable. In that situation having a browser with a lower ressource usage is essential. Greetings Andreas Kemnade
Hi, In a nutshell: * FLTK2 halves the memory footprint of GTK1 [1]. * GTK2 is bigger and can double GTK1 [2] (4x factor). This means the increased binary size of a FLTK2 dillo static binary is compensated after browsing a couple of pages. I hope FLTK stops being a problem when FLTK-1.3 is released and included in the distros repos. We'll switch to it as soon as the release is available. [1] http://www.dillo.org/memory.html [2] http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/pipermail/dillo-dev/2006-September/003097.htm... -- Cheers Jorge.-
participants (2)
-
andreas@kemnade.info
-
jcid@dillo.org