From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#14233: 24.3; Don't constrain frame size to character multiples Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:50:52 -0700 Message-ID: <0236F2C22122491B91D8CE2D6440AA2F@us.oracle.com> References: <2r7gjy2gyy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83bo991z00.fsf@gnu.org> <517257A0.4080607@gmx.at> <071A708E-3A98-4D11-A15F-7AB92D5200DD@swipnet.se> <51727563.70905@gmx.at> <5172908F.7090206@swipnet.se> <15A11044A1774F1DB7F4D5E0FA8DC143@us.oracle.com> <83fvylyvlh.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1366494683 6996 80.91.229.3 (20 Apr 2013 21:51:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:51:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: esabof@gmail.com, 14233@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 20 23:51:27 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UTfgt-0007FS-6I for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 23:51:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37077 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UTfgs-00047c-S8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:51:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36243) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UTfgo-00047L-VB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:51:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UTfgn-0005lU-UB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:51:22 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:58201) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UTfgn-0005lQ-Qi for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:51:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UTflK-0001sr-87 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:56:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:56:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 14233 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 14233-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B14233.13664949527223 (code B ref 14233); Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:56:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 14233) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Apr 2013 21:55:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34077 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UTfl8-0001sR-VP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:55:51 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:28935) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UTfl6-0001sI-EV for 14233@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:55:49 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r3KLp4ue024225 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:51:04 GMT Original-Received: from userz7022.oracle.com (userz7022.oracle.com [156.151.31.86]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3KLp2X7014509 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:51:03 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt110.oracle.com (abhmt110.oracle.com [141.146.116.62]) by userz7022.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3KLp1KJ008897; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:51:01 GMT Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/71.202.147.44) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:51:01 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <83fvylyvlh.fsf@gnu.org> Thread-Index: Ac496k1egw0c0Q7hTVmEQSyrtG5l7gAGWlNg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:73533 Archived-At: > Yes. But there are no problems with that, and it is unrelated to this > discussion. > > > IOW, "Text" and the text area are not just about lines and > > columns anymore, at least when it comes to resizing a window > > or frame to fit it. > > "Lines and columns" are just units of measurement in the context of > this discussion. No one is saying that Emacs should be able to > display only integral number of characters and lines; that restriction > was removed in Emacs 21, and no one would even dream about going back. > IOW, I cannot possibly see how your comments are related to what is > being discussed here. If this is not at all related to being able to compute/determine the actual pixel size of various buffer/window/frame areas, in particular the "text" area, then please excuse the interruption. But if it does concern that, at least in part, then please reread my post. You seem to be saying that such problems were solved long ago (Emacs 21, no less). But no, it is an open enhancement request to be able to compute the buffer "text" area size in pixels, as _displayed_ (in order, e.g., to fit a window/frame to it). See, for example: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2011-01/msg00323.html http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=7822 Again, apologies if this in fact has nothing to do with the current thread. I thought it did (and still think it does, so far - but you will please set me straight).