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#29805: 27.0; doc of `tooltip-resize-echo-area' Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:33:48 +0100 Message-ID: <5A3E14EC.3010809@gmx.at> References: <5A3D4775.2010700@gmx.at> <7614565b-94d6-40fe-a3d1-cf51235a21bc@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1514017997 4684 195.159.176.226 (23 Dec 2017 08:33:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 08:33:17 +0000 (UTC) To: Drew Adams , 29805@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 23 09:33:12 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 1eSfF1-0000pV-3L for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:33:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40996 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eSfGz-0004Tp-K0 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:35:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33471) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eSfGs-0004Tf-54 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:35:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eSfGp-0004I2-0R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:35:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:39996) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eSfGo-0004Hr-Sm for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:35:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eSfGo-0008Jh-I9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:35:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 08:35:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 29805 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 29805-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B29805.151401804431877 (code B ref 29805); Sat, 23 Dec 2017 08:35:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 29805) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Dec 2017 08:34:04 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48676 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eSfFs-0008I5-KH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:34:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:49191) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eSfFq-0008HX-6J for 29805@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:34:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([46.125.250.11]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LtlG5-1fA4aY3aMP-011DHc; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:33:51 +0100 In-Reply-To: <7614565b-94d6-40fe-a3d1-cf51235a21bc@default> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:JrfGftJEdRzW67OnnpI9Gqx3/WJNuIOJv0BdmEb6hP9vvznAWiv yrSxPA5dkvk8JwnjcjmUqbP4L5Z0hGB8N7u+kytWoRGHfauYwwgohBMICNUPyJXx/aTYsTS uHClr/RJ/EZarGWA4Zf3MLKOorah5tw4IznUuDVLoNCdI1HKLl+zpGuzFszckMa9PPbf14Y qwWHv28HX03WgsLUTDWew== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:UBTguG9N2eM=:p13wLArTFb6hbK8rtxz+hz ZuIb48H14FSvEN2RKr5k5XC3XrOqbt4HZfqTUtFCOUXkJfjC9xZXWdAa6DJFo3B0KEdXVeV/L Lk9L9CQolr+YpQVJk/T6jWHvw2Ztfz0ONFqBGs9eBuagwXqhmaM8hWGwwLvJqvpLzZpWSeMik uNyMGLsLPpKtQIzx09l+hFBCdYknnBgl/uqzKyeaMEqAFpaPzoy18or9FlSdWQYzwbmCpVwXI SFl9ram9fpUsIbXynWFXYW1GF7IiZmiAGmg8lgQW28r6WRYJVRV9dyYOudyq/thTM7E2MmGWU VbMJP61eW9lEIPVrHDTO+MnrjPVjNOCSqvdVwXGy6GnkIOm4mZwrZyvy33R5KnxSELqJbzbM4 Zx0pPTkx+cisCC7OoUMdtPpjWYwm6y0nN/OpncuZ7x8O7rfZgfEO7D/7J6IF0abLT23s8yi7P KI+YqcnYWaiSnjt5BkZERsKslRxOJEODydMNh+HUcuzqdYUWsmSMd74yENUHH7jmmWSsPDjQa YoInUb9xUFNiHkwSBOuPqFvl9KK1csL/YX/wNVxl2ja4frHhdxmEFqfWY1HDLmG3qJ5gf82vC lVRoWUE6sKCfpQQ2/2yrBCdNrLw/Zx3FzM5elydlg2jYeWZoC8dQCYPv0knphxfzc0vaJmVEv QeQRoth9Q01266WhCZZ1/E722nwGU1i02JEpfKr5uh8SSvqfH5R8/pQ7mlCP5IYzqTNLWNEzt xJttbSVvIIio+LYUevorrV7sEnq56kcB+WDDevW2id/kQb2lt6jC7mE+X1VKVm1B8zJGzbYE 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:141409 Archived-At: >> So the question to be >> answered first is: Do we ever want to fit stand-alone minibuffer >> frames to their buffers? > > Please don't bother for me, anyway. ;-) If we don't want to, the entire remainder of this discussion is moot. > The bug report was really to suggest that such doc about > resizing the space for the minibuffer / echo area should > not lead people to believe that such resizing resizes a > frame. It applies only to a window in a frame that is > not minibuffer-only (AFAICT), so that should be made clear. Resizing the echo area when showing a tooltip is just a special case of resizing the minibuffer window so any reasonable discussion of the former would have to start with the latter. >> But the first question that comes to my mind is why we now have the >> option `tooltip-resize-echo-area' which, according to its doc-string >> "has effect only on GUI frames" while in Emacs 24.1 we have declared >> `tooltip-use-echo-area' obsolete and suggested to disable tooltips >> instead. > > 1. No idea why we now have it. > 2. The doc string is wrong to refer to `tooltip-use-echo-area'. Which doc string does (2)? >> Resolved that, we should probably then also say that >> `tooltip-resize-echo-area' has effect iff `resize-mini-windows' is >> non-nil. > > And why isn't `resize-mini-windows' enough? Is this about > resizing ONLY the echo area and not the minibuffer? (Does > that even make sense?) > > It's all unclear to me. To me too. I have no idea why we (or at least an Emacs user) should ever have to distinguish betweeen echo area and minibuffer. There's no practical need for that. martin