From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16033: 24.3.50; window--reseize-this-window, args-out-of-range Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 11:49:42 +0100 Message-ID: <529F08C6.50804@gmx.at> References: <877gbmxxec.fsf@yagnesh.org> <83vbz64cc5.fsf@gnu.org> <529D8EA2.7020809@gmx.at> <529E4F8B.5020200@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1386154221 14210 80.91.229.3 (4 Dec 2013 10:50:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 10:50:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16033@debbugs.gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 04 11:50:24 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 1VoA2B-0008Ng-Qs for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 11:50:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47535 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VoA2B-0004P4-F6 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:50:23 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55863) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VoA21-0004Nz-C7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:50:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VoA1u-0006h3-2x for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:50:13 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43360) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VoA1u-0006gr-0U for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:50:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VoA1s-0008MV-Mr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:50:05 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 10:50:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16033 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 16033-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16033.138615420132130 (code B ref 16033); Wed, 04 Dec 2013 10:50:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16033) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Dec 2013 10:50:01 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57379 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VoA1o-0008M9-7f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:50:00 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:55306) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VoA1g-0008Ll-BN for 16033@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:49:59 -0500 Original-Received: from [62.47.32.92] ([62.47.32.92]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M0tr1-1VSdpQ22il-00v9yJ for <16033@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 11:49:51 +0100 In-Reply-To: <529E4F8B.5020200@cs.ucla.edu> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:0VjOq7jpRNHHYitvTfJLi81AHpSZfRlavNS/WGmLPIKS0M/j8P/ vrXGeG31RCfhAjvC1JbGuBib9bgxzB6afGsk247480wuU2ql9y59aYwOb9qiXAJg46bLvn2 5QInsknbWIsNDzNI7SnrAy+DabKOWTBC9UwutGXZfDNGnCtUaPUbc3UbHAi87JbWqj4j2jU WPZKtD0UNC04bmUwvoOJg== X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.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:81354 Archived-At: > Thanks for the quick fix! I just mimicked what you did for positive values. > I installed what I hope is > an improved version, in trunk bzr 115366. My assumption > is that new_pixel must be nonnegative (even though the > increment to new_pixel is allowed to be negative); > if this is wrong please let me know. Your assumption is correct. martin