From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#40774: Error messages shouldn't be hidden when the user is idle Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 18:48:24 +0200 Message-ID: <831r2gmox3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <838sine4si.fsf@gnu.org> <837dy7e3wr.fsf@gnu.org> <-ZmNQQ07JD7L0I5EpXolv4t1UhWBGc4SN0dkJml3cLbBjO6ucAMUzAqsI9Ca69xO_hzlMLfaLs6bY9vq8GAR24RUGu1LZqVoVkXhiJcFgtg=@protonmail.com> <835zdre31u.fsf@gnu.org> <87v9lpluez.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <874koxwi1t.fsf@gnus.org> <86pmqa51cz.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87bl1uojxd.fsf@gnus.org> <86czmakaem.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87tufmnuz6.fsf@gnus.org> <86bl1uyt8f.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87r1aocf5p.fsf@gnus.org> <83czm7xozh.fsf@gnu.org> <86wnkerjgt.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <8335n2x3w5.fsf@gnu.org> <865yrtiqb6.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83wnk9mwmx.fsf@gnu.org> <86v8ztfuga.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="2201"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 40774@debbugs.gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org, ndame@protonmail.com To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 13 17:52:58 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoZO-0000QX-6J for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:52:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55490 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoZN-0002tB-5w for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:52:57 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54014) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoVe-0006aA-Ex for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:49:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45119) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoVZ-0005t4-Vp for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:49:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoVZ-0007Hg-OF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:49:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:49:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 40774 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 40774-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B40774.163941412127969 (code B ref 40774); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:49:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 40774) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Dec 2021 16:48:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56665 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoVF-0007H3-9X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:48:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53110) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoVA-0007Gn-3o for 40774@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:48:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=36446 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoV4-0005p9-73; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:48:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=g4swwqvESH7Ii0yf9TVsC3pnjdhV4R0INZiHzRezUCo=; b=XqGXTAKhReZY pn3udy+rytHHIvl5nQ6ttnCRe56EbSwZ4JxLy8rovnHbyXwiQ8uquSopeNt+BAwna20hKPdXYvDu6 4mhWr0dF4WRxYVbbaEsb0/XaIacg1YfRTyV+xk5rbbWe9grNN0kz6mqIJ+Uu350xRGXZHBZ2q+deM G1iVYrhW6UTc0+o596UILzHqEc1kzvSNuMjyProBPoo3GaoFQ/J8c/y37bpmQkP2BFJIoHQ36x0YN sb8BL7sUZU1doEfFthW1FVmFcmHx5dBBgTE0ZchrKeEz2hcIc0O4U4eJVe84nrAhJ6m/MqhqKmGXX FFQf0w70NjqLe30TtBLpKw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=1113 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwoV4-000774-0P; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:48:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: <86v8ztfuga.fsf@mail.linkov.net> (message from Juri Linkov on Sun, 12 Dec 2021 22:18:29 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:222327 Archived-At: > From: Juri Linkov > Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 40774@debbugs.gnu.org, ndame@protonmail.com > Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2021 22:18:29 +0200 > > >> > Btw, what does the change of the order between the call of > >> > clear-message-function and setting echo_area_buffer[0] to nil mean, > >> > compatibility-wise? won't it also produce different results, even if > >> > the return value is nil? > >> > >> When the return value is nil, it will still clear the echo area. > > > > That wasn't what I asked. I asked whether the change in the order > > could matter. Specifically, we now set echo_area_buffer[0] to nil > > after we run clear-message-function, not before. Can that affect > > some customization of clear-message-function? > > Actually, it should not affect customizations because such customizations > should not touch the echo-area. It's the task of clear_message > to handle the echo-area. Isn't there some Lisp-visible effect of that, like that the echo-area will appear empty after the assignment? If so, then the clear-message-function was previously running with the echo-area buffer nil, but now it won't. > >> > IOW, shouldn't we provide some completely different optional feature > >> > for this use case? Like a special buffer that pops up or a special > >> > frame? Echo-area is not suited for showing large chunks of text, and > >> > my gut feeling is that we will bump into problems on this path. E.g., > >> > what happens when there are enough accumulated messages that they can > >> > no longer be shown with the maximum allowed height of the mini-window? > >> > >> This is exactly what functions bound to clear-message-function intended to do. > > > > ??? This function is about _clearing_ the echo-area, whereas I was > > talking about the _display_ in the echo-area. I'm saying that I'm not > > sure echo-area display is suited for the jobs that this bug wants it > > to do. As an example, I asked what would happen when the echo-area > > can no longer be resized to accommodate all the messages that were not > > cleared. > > clear-message-function can handle not only echo-area but also e.g. > the minibuffer messages. In case of the returned value, by using > 'dont-clear-message' it can sometimes tell the function clear_message > to not clear the echo-area, so there are no resizing problems. > It doesn't add more lines to the existing echo-area. I gave an example of how using this for that purpose could be a problem, and you responded only to that example. But the problem that bothers me is much more general, and you are silent about that larger problem. I'm asking once again: aren't we trying to use echo-area messages or minibuffer messages displayed in the mini-window for a job that they weren't intended to do: showing large amounts of messages at the same time?