Re: [dev] [st] 0.3 release

From: Brandon Invergo <>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 14:05:06 +0100

> I tried this and found that st version 386 actually does better, i.e.
> lower CPU usage, than urxvt.

To be honest, I hadn't yet tried it with urxvt. I just tried it now (on
the aforementioned quad-core x86_64) and I got:

term peak CPU %
---- ----------
st 19%
xterm 1%
urxvt 9%

Obviously it'll vary from computer to computer but there's clearly a
difference, particularly with xterm. The mission then is to put on some
deep sea diving gear and wade into the murky depths of xterm code to
figure out how they're doing it (or just come up with a better solution
on our own).

Received on Mon Nov 05 2012 - 14:05:06 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Nov 05 2012 - 14:12:07 CET