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#22000: Patch addressing the menu-bar frame-resize interaction Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:19:32 +0200 Message-ID: <5B504994.3090202@gmx.at> References: <87k2p8h1vn.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> <5B4C4911.8040900@gmx.at> <5B4D9F5F.20506@gmx.at> <5B4EE5AF.5000304@gmx.at> 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 1531988288 5201 195.159.176.226 (19 Jul 2018 08:18:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:18:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 22000@debbugs.gnu.org, David Engster To: Vivek Dasmohapatra Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 19 10:18:04 2018 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 1fg48R-0001Fe-Rk for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:18:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40966 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fg4AY-0004rM-Pa for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:20:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39375) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fg4AR-0004qh-GB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:20:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fg4AM-0007td-HK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:20:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:42456) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fg4AM-0007tO-CM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:20:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fg4AL-00084K-WF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:20:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:20:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22000 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 22000-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22000.153198839831003 (code B ref 22000); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:20:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22000) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jul 2018 08:19:58 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47474 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fg4AI-00083z-5w for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:19:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:59663) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fg4AG-00083f-HJ for 22000@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:19:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([212.95.5.222]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MHHZT-1flLME25PX-00E4zH; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:19:41 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:25em9FdNEu7vAJJktd/Ft6sysU4tNuL8fMgwUqrmKDWC7r4VY+R N0/+52hOdvl4v2FLBS0T7rvATF2XBww0m6aoPrcZ2hDN6oS7q9iyhge99KVIv7WKgxdEKfr qOXrflCyQW4ye9YyhEYFSmbm7n1w95HcwFx34GD9/otn9qwSPl4ZeJJBF8fMXzkbuvCWx0R /HfBFlgXXWNs9v/JYbGfQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:EcQSt9UvgQw=:FjjlSARJfTi8RkpQVfVb61 L2msD2Ua8PjWMEvquW1GuG1RZHtyhGi2iXTIrX8C7/rA0tNTrTkr7nU9bjJR856YtKbVh44it pMM9WQk9C7vOE3kclh/1Z9XvGz4fsy7waV6TQXE5bnF1XTtsy8TYmGnpe3eV4PLFnHnyKKPk1 0r1QQWUZFEG6FkD32axPq11NQcK++VTqmeoYA3i+XeGusaY1J17jjd4vzylWFm30xOqnYGMI0 0sAwHrWMVXbZ8vh0YkSYy/wstCHZ1BuXuX7v7jltWJkdvqIQ1Q9/seHnp9EF8YVjdao05eHfu OkPgx34z72XjEjjUW+chtZC2cfX3mYmCIXBEpOqw1BCitLBSUi3mzWhZkp6OvNjri6cynm0v5 TaYQYTY5/SpmcR/xYqrrgPXuOgwB+uvqIgxW9ZqnSDMMfQBZv6Qey/X/VTQoKpWKVUc+vbrlT i9R8D0qZ4dcy0seSgqJUHqCgpkJJnN3o1m6dBauJUZhY3IjfJC6gaie0Pv1y61dRiOXoHO+0L ykuQNy6jZiK7cpyCro7uv22BUAwyTkcCx8tuC30yLpu3QLeHH24l832WrbikHAxOUqJSDps6L NgT8bpA6m4p8mIxsZkJ/lkm9iDXcRK7TCG8sXfmNV9QlACwy5fPvsD0qgfRMYfKvjEQlXml2u h98cOvjpJiVkZdiM5a1MxbMqOb9Z6YrlbYeqLsvQv1MHOVawKC3/Su2Om6j1wb1KQXIjlPH+7 kDFxh/5+rEwWDXNhNtXVGwW0Z3a4+JmreFVmEuDulnvyUocu8zwGESgJ5xJe4s0MYjxCsebL 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:148661 Archived-At: >> suppose we used a non-scrolled container window to put the menu bar >> in, get its size before updating the menu bar, update the menu bar and >> make a gtk_widget_set_size request for that container window to >> restore its previous size. Would that fail and why? > > Depends on the behaviour of the container. The menu bar gets poked > to emit its size from time to time by an internal gtk callback Can you point me to where gtk does that? > so if the container respects its wishes it will pop back to the larger > size semi-predictably (this behaviour can occasionally be seen in > the currently released emacs as that's how the hbox behaves). I suppose the container respecting its wishes is that of the Emacs frame's window. And if that container were a scrolled window, it would not auto-resize. Do I reason correctly? > So we'd need a container that didn't grant such space requests. > gtk fixed is close, but from its documentation has other > limitations we don't want (no RTL support). I'm probably too silly to understand the semantics of containers: The menu bar widget's size is not fixed so its RTL behavior (and the font/translation issues gtkfixed talks about) would not be affected. Only the "virtual" container we'd add would have fixed size but this does not mean that it passes on the fixed size property to the menu bar's widget. Inherently, this means that we would be cheating GTK another time. Or am I wrong? > You can turn scrollbars off in a scrolled window but unfortunately > this results in the scrolled window responding to size allocation > requests from its child. This is incoherent, at least. Could we suppress horizontal scroll bars separately in a scrolled window (because I think that these are responsible for the height increase of the menu bar)? martin