But at the moment when it lags the system switches from hardware cursor to software cursor (CGCursorIsDrawnInFramebuffer() goes from 0 to 1) so maybe that transition is stalled somehow on Macbook Neo.
With the disclaimer that I have zero knowledge of the MacBook Neo hardware, but I do know a bit about GPUs in general (including having written some GPU-accelerated drivers for Windows and the associated cursor-handling code), I'm going to make a wild guess: this lag is caused by waiting for the GPU command queue to flush.
As a bit of background information: the GPU is fed commands from a queue that the CPU writes to. These commands perform the drawing operations that the GPU is designed to accelerate. A hardware cursor is basically a small bitmap that can be positioned anywhere on the screen and moved around by simply updating position registers (which is normally done per mouse interrupt); the hardware draws it automatically. A software cursor is manually drawn by the graphics stack, which saves what was under it, draws the cursor, and then whenever it needs to be moved, writes the original data back, saves the data at the new position, and then draws the cursor there.
Flushing the command queue is necessary when switching to a software cursor, or otherwise doing software writes to the framebuffer, because you need to wait for the GPU to finish drawing what it has queued, or it may end up drawing over what software wants to draw, including the cursor. Or worse, the command is a blit (e.g. scrolling a window) and you end up with remnants of the cursor at its previous position.
But wouldn't the software cursor operations also go in the queue? I don't see the problem.
For something as small as a cursor they could be doing direct framebuffer writes.
I’m not sure what the bug is, but this is a terrible fix. What this is doing is forcing the WindowServer to composite the cursor rather than treat it as a hardware overlay. I suppose the issue must be pretty bad for OP if this helps, but … ugh.
This is such a nice fix but then you install it's set it up to launch on start and forget about it. 5 years later the bug has been fixed for 4 and I still have tho script record a random pixel every 10 seconds.
Never know how to know that the hacky fix is no longer needed
You could just put it in your calendar. 'Check if that hacky bugfix at ~/.dirtyhack.sh is still required with chmod -x ~/.dirtyhack.sh'
Or do a counter with read n<.hackycounter;echo $[n+1]>.hackycounter
When the counter hits e.g. 200, spam the user with notifications.
Steve turning in his grave
Relevant quote from https://www.folklore.org/Shut_Up.html:
We showed [Gates] how the Macintosh mouse cursor moved smoothly, in a flicker-free fashion.
"What kind of hardware do you use to draw the cursor?", he asked. Many current personal computers had special hardware to draw small bitmaps called "sprites", and he thought we might be doing something similar.
Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.
Is the fix working because it forces the WindowServer to do a full composition of the cursor overlay, or just because it prevents the system from throttling down into a lower power mode?
What's with "guard !foo else return" instead of "if foo return", is that just how Swift is written?
guard is an inverted if statement, with the additional requirement that the branch must exit the parent scope. It's useful sometimes for readability, particularly for avoiding the "pyramid of doom" when you have a lot of preconditions that need to be checked:
if fooOK
if barOK {
if bazOK {
// do something
}
}
}
can be written as:
guard fooOK else { return }
guard barOK else { return }
guard bazOK else { return }
// do something
Obviously there are other options (like writing a negated if), but sometimes guard is more readable. It's a style thing.
The more important use case for guard is that 'guard let' statements can pattern-match and introduce bindings that are valid for the rest of the scope:
guard let foo = someOptional else { return }
print(foo);
This is useful enough that Rust copied it in the form of 'let ... else {}' statements (but did not bring over boolean guard statements).
guard has two advantages: the compiler ensures that you exit the current scope if the condition does not hold (via return, break, continue, etc), and bindings established in the guard clause (e.g. let foo = optionalBar) remaining in scope after the guard block, rather than inside it like an if block.
The duality of TheTon’s and anotherpaul’s comments.
ah yes, the famous mac "Just works" OS