From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
Cc: 46827@debbugs.gnu.org, rpluim@gmail.com, stephen.berman@gmx.net
Subject: bug#46827: Broken initial size of GTK3 frame
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2021 13:15:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <83ft18wn1q.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <735366e4-389c-1c71-438d-6d928de02e44@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:40:04 +0100)
> Cc: stephen.berman@gmx.net, rpluim@gmail.com, 46827@debbugs.gnu.org
> From: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:40:04 +0100
>
> >> if (!must_finish)
> >> {
> >> do_pending_window_change (true);
> >> /* If selected_window changed, redisplay again. */
> >> if (WINDOWP (selected_window)
> >> && (w = XWINDOW (selected_window)) != sw)
> >> goto retry;
> >>
> >> not check for windows_or_buffers_changed too just as we do after the
> >> third do_pending_window_change call?
> >
> > Because going to 'retry' will eventually make that check again. Or
> > maybe I don't understand what exactly are you asking here?
>
> The check above doesn't care about windows_or_buffers_changed. The last
> one in redisplay_internal does:
>
> /* Change frame size now if a change is pending. */
> do_pending_window_change (true);
>
> /* If we just did a pending size change, or have additional
> visible frames, or selected_window changed, redisplay again. */
> if ((windows_or_buffers_changed && !pending)
> || (WINDOWP (selected_window)
> && (w = XWINDOW (selected_window)) != sw))
> goto retry;
>
> So if in the (!must_finish) guarded check windows_or_buffers_changed was
> set but the selected window remained unchanged, we don't go to retry.
I still don't see the problem, because that last check you show above
will catch that, right?
> >> But then I don't understand why we
> >> check for windows_or_buffers_changed at all. adjust_frame_size doesn't
> >> set that IIUC but it does garbage the frame - why don't we check that in
> >> redisplay_internal?
> >
> > Sorry, I don't understand the question. We _are_ talking about
> > redisplay_internal, right? and redisplay_internal does check
> > windows_or_buffers_changed, right? so what do you mean by "why don't
> > we check that in redisplay_internal"? and what is "that" in this case?
>
> I meant to ask why we don't check the f->garbaged flag of the frame
> instead of windows_or_buffers_changed. do_pending_window_change to my
> knowledge does not set windows_or_buffers_changed but sets the garbaged
> flag.
SET_FRAME_GARBAGED also causes windows_or_buffers_changed to be set.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-06 11:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-28 9:31 bug#46827: Broken initial size of GTK3 frame martin rudalics
2021-02-28 18:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-03-01 8:32 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 9:46 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 8:31 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 10:15 ` Robert Pluim
2021-03-01 12:38 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 13:30 ` Robert Pluim
2021-03-01 13:53 ` Robert Pluim
2021-03-01 18:03 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 18:23 ` Robert Pluim
2021-03-01 18:32 ` Robert Pluim
2021-03-01 19:05 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 19:04 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 20:00 ` Robert Pluim
2021-03-02 8:24 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 19:49 ` Stephen Berman
2021-03-02 8:24 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-02 9:07 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-02 10:11 ` Robert Pluim
2021-03-02 14:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-03-02 16:07 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-02 16:35 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-03-03 8:48 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-03 9:05 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-03-03 9:40 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-06 11:15 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2021-03-06 19:28 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-02 9:17 ` Stephen Berman
2021-03-02 10:02 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 18:03 ` martin rudalics
2021-03-01 14:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-03-01 18:04 ` martin rudalics
2021-04-27 8:23 ` martin rudalics
2021-04-29 16:13 ` Juri Linkov
2021-04-29 17:06 ` martin rudalics
2021-04-29 23:06 ` Juri Linkov
2021-04-30 6:26 ` martin rudalics
2021-04-30 17:12 ` Juri Linkov
2021-04-30 17:37 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-01 20:06 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-02 7:38 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-02 20:46 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-03 7:49 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-03 16:40 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-03 16:51 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-03 17:01 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-03 17:32 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-04 8:07 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-04 21:33 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-05 7:25 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-05 20:34 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-06 7:45 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-07 16:52 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-10 8:23 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-10 20:39 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-11 8:44 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-11 17:49 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-12 8:47 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-12 17:28 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-13 7:54 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-13 16:24 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-14 7:08 ` martin rudalics
2021-05-14 18:10 ` Juri Linkov
2021-05-15 7:56 ` martin rudalics
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=83ft18wn1q.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=46827@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=rpluim@gmail.com \
--cc=rudalics@gmx.at \
--cc=stephen.berman@gmx.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).