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#22068: 25.0.50; Delayed reaction to switching frames? Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 11:05:37 +0100 Message-ID: <565EC271.1030201@gmx.at> References: <87lh9et87o.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <565EAA66.70002@gmx.at> <87h9k1s0ng.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1449050789 16046 80.91.229.3 (2 Dec 2015 10:06:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 10:06:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 22068@debbugs.gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 02 11:06:13 2015 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 1a44Id-00067n-Uy for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 11:06:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57213 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a44Id-0007I7-Fx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:06:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a44IY-0007Ej-Fk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:06:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a44IU-00019w-Dr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:06:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45972) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a44IU-00019p-AK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:06:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a44IT-0003E5-QL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:06:01 -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, 02 Dec 2015 10:06:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22068 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 22068-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22068.144905074712378 (code B ref 22068); Wed, 02 Dec 2015 10:06:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22068) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Dec 2015 10:05:47 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35680 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a44IE-0003DZ-Eq for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:05:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:62480) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a44IB-0003DQ-Vd for 22068@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:05:44 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([212.95.7.21]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lu7ty-1aSeB62Yxa-011U2s; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 11:05:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87h9k1s0ng.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:eVfr/zgUfZdS7iEaxW0ziE5Df7sMvmbv22tB0yw7rgpBs0y/7O1 bdNY8i+ndLVPXdpUiEP7OyIYL/mikIFt/LR+IDdostjCgncNQd7mbKjpPuJ654CgAhxeNbs s7JhhYzDfjVLdzqsJFwsxyEDqPXGjTV9Qgq2wg1bvJp6US29gwlsMdBoCY0+sfcA9pLhder RtSqvLS4Q9J+wTproL16w== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:gxb18LA9W2U=:7SthNAVCZgGJqhPsataQ80 xJ9D5gEI7GqzDloyk+gKTMdJ87YkPUZlMaHhKYLeFecWcBRWir3CJoLqAFfON1eCayp2sOErZ kURXhOaiad1Uu8B/ThC+2s5fj7oVXJNQV1PT7Nh8gF9Pmx+zgPsLZdaNU4k1HG2Rqa4qu6H4V xTYSjjODEoHgaFbzOvuOnawQGbsLzkwn4ILy4LDrekADId/LT18aXJ+AWNRhfnnQ5vimLTiFO TCpDmXOuaMYYXAgVGiY8/dQWgR/ffWxziUpEzxL5MqY3dO8BnFygabFEmpxaZKkN1hD8KAn3J qu68PYFNFq50ncSplHy1OUplXpeAk+uyqCWkQI5pnmqG3Tg/JOV/4RhV8txE3iyPrQ5VtQqmj gUxQFrgrvXBMFdEYGjH9ZjZ1HFBt2YyMXXVJVABfuukyeOH059fOLzePlbPuXrcKnaffXRZf1 wVzIC+d1JC2fjYlZbn7ufAXjZ5HEg/zy6hlQ5MJD9l3Lz2PPm2tgCzKIwYZ5Zdxosjr6hdnhL tUNYXv1iw/JmqT/2qQKjOpbVIFTq2w2jEc3tsrOKUwHGW7Yr5vY+fJ/YIsyAHVT+fi9wImzM3 pD/LYTnvDmTAZHVvp7LIDSI6A9fmrXspEoSyDlYTy0NG1DZcKryUPFPfhJqtEN0yNkErvxvWM nJkS3aXqXeBivGrR9t9kvRRP94kt50wD3eRlPa8cj5HYsuH2UYXWPwlqn4/TqjBEW9X4pKAB5 fEVFfACSXdPy8+K87NTTJQkUs01Hx/g3186469HZ3MSgLDq/ujwzuOuP7GTTRurKl9HEAWEk 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: 208.118.235.43 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:109523 Archived-At: > No, doesn't help. I mean, when moving the mouse over, it still takes > half a second for the frame highlighting to change, indicating the > changed focus from the view of the window manager (I guess). So I > cannot vouch that the window manager isn't involved in the delayed frame > switch. I just tried with xfwm4. Here a focus_delay of 185 (ms I presume) behaves as expected while a delay of 1850 shows the behavior you describe. > And indeed: the strange switch-frame- keyboard echo ... which happens also when the prompt appears in the frame the mouse moved to and I now move the mouse back to the other one - I always wondered how to get rid of them ... > as a reply to the > "changed on disk; really edit the buffer?" prompt in connection with the > minibuffer (and actual keyboard focus) staying in the old frame in spite > of the mouse pointer and the focus highlighting having moved over: that > remains the same even if I keep the apparently perceived order of > events: I cannot switch frames in reply to the "really edit the buffer" > prompt. All this seems very hardcoded in choose_minibuf_frame. > If I answer (with focus in the old frame and mouse pointer in the new > frame) "n" to that question, the error message "xxx: changed on disk" > then appears in the new frame, and so does the focus. > > So while the delayed switch may or may not be Emacs' fault, the annoying > effect of not reacting to the frame change as long as the prompt is > active does not depend on the timing of the switch. I'm afraid lots of this has been special coded to work for stand alone minibuffer frames. These have to pop up and keep focus till the reply arrives. martin