From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#28605: 26.0.60; Part of leftmost character hidden Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 14:46:51 +0200 Message-ID: <59E0B5BB.6070302@gmx.at> References: <87wp4c750c.fsf@gmail.com> <59D4A45F.5010606@gmx.at> <87tvzfjfcp.fsf@gmail.com> <59D5E8F6.8080002@gmx.at> <87efqikk0x.fsf@gmail.com> <87a815lq3w.fsf@gmail.com> <59D73C6F.3020907@gmx.at> <87o9pk65ae.fsf@gmail.com> <59D74E49.2000605@gmx.at> <87a8145wcr.fsf@gmail.com> <59DCCA92.8090501@gmx.at> <59DDD72B.3040003@gmx.at> <59DF2220.4030705@gmx.at> <87d15sn257.fsf@gmail.com> <59E07FC9.9050907@gmx.at> <87376n4bfb.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1507898905 12488 195.159.176.226 (13 Oct 2017 12:48:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 12:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ola Nilsson , Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen , 28605@debbugs.gnu.org, Kaushal To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 13 14:48:20 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zNm-00013A-3E for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 14:48:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50138 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zNr-0007YF-Tf for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:48:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39651) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zNl-0007Wy-AW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:48:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zNi-0005SW-3B for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:48:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:56533) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zNh-0005SI-VG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:48:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zNh-0007du-IR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:48:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 12:48:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28605 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 28605-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28605.150789882629243 (code B ref 28605); Fri, 13 Oct 2017 12:48:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28605) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Oct 2017 12:47:06 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36981 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zMn-0007bb-NO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:47:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:49475) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e2zMl-0007aw-BH for 28605@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:47:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([46.125.249.63]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LvhC4-1dAyYN2YhQ-017T4p; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 14:46:55 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87376n4bfb.fsf@gmail.com> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:qxTZwqYofTil9jbhITz/SZqLWPHcNw+XOWQV0WF6MIwzj+wF2V4 lbByRpzezZ/JuKVYJMNQ5vR3pnCbukjCUYxMSzpSVeYGj4gtTnVmWmp+MlL66eFB38d1ZHU vjOmBZ9KcaqbhQYScsf6SzhYZiabinfKt8CdVpUi7eSrEWOWwoh/mlIyFmdEHkkVTSUSBtL 7jS2mv3W6k/IO6W7simxw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:Ypaea9c9ubE=:+8OcvbL9959VZ4LcA9vhdL +BO3v679gkUnbbzj4g//vwGxe9w7gk1nEWL7tNh1CdpqjPgWv5SRThm+IOODWUEpX7bVsNy/7 2mr8Mv2OlX/FWw9ZXXsx8vq+iUu/aqoQQ2wLNhOymsVCGvzH1O6UUL8MkDx7YArvtGVwifs3A zCCD7oeSh+uzNS22iBF6EcNqmU4M7TlTTgcLaWRsWJOYxvytOVmSC1FUFGngAtG/Pj6spjipW f7aDg6yXMMQMo7NEjC7yUfcbXo8amWQVsH2sFe0BeKlX5rN5P9rVzHKOAxwQbqsMGDWFlUlBb poo90rNBkm8yiYyBccD7AS9qIuJqIpuAn02fuDk24lUCayID4a9B7e5ZotqnsGd42TDKk6yQ3 KKBxu5KivMdeVaVCDvR/HaxvjtRHUWEqlZoWEEA55sIpFTNeWgEC/t2s/y9XKtqQEIlVQS43G b31NOvmekJjdIdZSI/W5tBxCUpY49nJ4/g7SLx9PmrWqiL09BflXJhbtnKYt9KojBCJaWaVnm xKXkPR7zQZ3A0R3bRpH0nRircsVITi0Q2Ehu0xhXQmOP1VjjEZeH1qyhWXUjhn3qLZfrNh/Ax /pa+rjWSCpUE+FKRL0DC7qI65+JdLksxCtiDj+cY/Dgnq560UCb9w+37ThBWz4szGLnPN9n7x YbsYPoZ8gAqg3tPtZi2pUTzD1ukCH72/731ye6uI2Y0qeqU4BWzlbyZjvAod6wgItBcYN6+S9 kKRLDrRWIWTkaHNo7qBfQE8s6zWdVrOOCBTN2+1oJbo/90ElEZ+atCwdlCwZ/LI8ycROYIOH X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:138338 Archived-At: > non-scaled: In the unscaled version we get one ConfigureNotify event for the removal and one for the re-addition as expected. With the scaled version we get two for each. The first two (when you remove the scroll bar) each increment the width by 18 pixels each, 36 pixels in sum. Strange but OK.= The third one decrements the width as expected by 36 pixels and leaves the height unchanged which is quite what we wanted. But then the fourth one increments the width back to where it was after the second one and decrements the height. Bad. > I don't observe that increase. The width of the frame after each > disable/enable cycle is unchanged as far as I can tell. How comes? The scaled version starts with (# adjust-frame-size-1 (1458 1100 1458 1100) (vertical-scroll-bars 3))) and ends with (# adjust-frame-size-1 (1494 998 1494 998) (set-window-configuration 1)) while the unscaled version starts with (# adjust-frame-size-1 (1386 1190 1386 1190) (vertical-scroll-bars 3))) and ends with (# adjust-frame-size-1 (1386 1190 1386 1190) (set-window-configuration 1)) So for the scaled version we have 1458x1100 -> 1494x998 while the unscaled version returns to the initial value. What do =E2=80=98frame-pixel-width=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98frame-pixel-height=E2=80= =99 return when called before, in the middle and after toggling in the scaled version? And maybe you could also look into the values returned by =E2=80=98frame-edges=E2=80=99= with varying arguments. Maybe they reveal something interesting. martin