From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7296: display-pixel-height not enough Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:59:04 +0200 Message-ID: <83d3qt77lj.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83hbg66vt4.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1288340008 18097 80.91.229.12 (29 Oct 2010 08:13:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 08:13:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 7296@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 29 10:13:25 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PBk5S-0005tt-BO for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:13:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43657 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PBk5R-0001fZ-HN for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 04:13:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45340 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PBk5G-0001ea-CE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 04:13:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PBk5D-00033n-K4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 04:13:10 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59161) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PBk5D-00033g-Eu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 04:13:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PBjog-0000Wt-Ep; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:56:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:56:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7296 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 7296-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7296.12883389052023 (code B ref 7296); Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:56:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7296) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2010 07:55:05 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PBjnk-0000Wa-90 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:55:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PBjnh-0000WE-Tj for 7296@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:55:03 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LB100H00KSOWY00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 7296@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:59:03 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.229.202]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LB100GXTKUAP8D0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:58:59 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:56:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:41213 Archived-At: > From: Lennart Borgman > Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 22:39:35 +0200 > Cc: 7296@debbugs.gnu.org > > > Wouldn't it make more sense for display-pixel-height/width to return > > the height available for display? > > Probably. But there are perhaps also situation when you actually want > to get the dimension of the whole display. Perhaps not at the moment, > but with enhanced frame handling there could be. What use-case could possibly want to know the dimensions that include unusable portion? > For the moment I think you suggestion is best. It will be more > backward compatible than my initial suggestion. Patches are welcome to implement that. Or at least if someone could explain how to find the dimensions of the unusable part, then someone else could write the code with minimal effort.