Adi Oanca <adioanca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Nope. Once we are done processing the _UPDATE_ request, if there > is something that still needs to be redrawn (another window passed > above > ours) the server will send another _UPDATE_ request. Now, we can't > stay > and wait for this 2nd update to arrive because we don't know how long > it > will take. This means that we have to do it synchronously - instead > of > letting app_server send the 2nd _UPDATE_ request, we tell him to give > it now as an attachment to the reply sent for our query message. > In this way, we can be 95% sure that UpdateIfNeeded(), really > updated all that was to be updated. The remaining 5% come from the > fact > that another regions of our window may become invalid while the 2nd > _UPDATE_ request would be over and the story could continue. > So, I think it's better we leave it the way it is now. [...] > When we'll have a beta you'll see there are no latency problems. > (I really don't want to start talking about this issue again, I spent > a > lot of time writing about this a couple months ago.) Okay, that sounds fine. I'll just wait and see how it turns out to work in the real world :-) Bye, Axel.