From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Philipp Stephani
> From: Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:09:52 +0000
> Cc: 24372@debbugs.gnu.org
>
>=C2=A0 > How about a variant of this below? It uses a fixed limitati= on from
>=C2=A0 > below on the delay, but only for the first blink. (The valu= e 0.2 was
>=C2=A0 > found by experimentation, not sure if we need to add yet an= other
>=C2=A0 > defcustom for that.)
>=C2=A0 >
>=C2=A0 > I don't think we should introduce magic numbers or furt= her customization options.
>
>=C2=A0 It solves the problem, doesn't it? I don't mind very muc= h if it were
>=C2=A0 a defcustom, I just think no one would want to change it.
>
> OK, then it would be great to document the new behavior in the documen= tation of `blink-cursor-delay' and also
> clarify what "starting to blink" means.
Done.
>=C2=A0 > > I've attached another patch with the change I have= in mind.
>=C2=A0 >
>=C2=A0 > This has a disadvantage of creating a new timer object each= time,
>=C2=A0 > which I think we'd like to avoid: too much consing. (Al= so, don't you
>=C2=A0 > need to set the timer variable to nil when the timer is dis= abled?)
>=C2=A0 >
>=C2=A0 > I don't understand - the patch doesn't create any a= dditional timers, it only changes the initial delay of
>=C2=A0 the
>=C2=A0 > idle-timer.
>
>=C2=A0 Each time blink-cursor--start-timer or blink-cursor--start-idle-= timer
>=C2=A0 is called, they create a new timer, right? And your patch makes = us
>=C2=A0 call these functions each time blinking is started or ended, rig= ht?
>
> No, the other patch is that it restarts the timers when the customizat= ion options are set. Otherwise the options
> only become effective after a focus-out/focus-in event or something si= milar that restarts the cursor.
>
>=C2=A0 > My patch is identical, except is uses blink-cursor-interval= as lower bound.
>
>=C2=A0 Of course. That's why I said it's a minor variant.
>
>=C2=A0 There's another difference, though: in my patch we only limi= t the
>=C2=A0 first argument to run-with-timer/run-with-idle-timer, not the se= cond.
>=C2=A0 So only the first blink cycle is affected.
>
> Doesn't that mean that the adjusted delay is applied only after th= e first command, but not after subsequent
> commands?
No, not AFAIK.=C2=A0 The idle time starts anew after each command.
Is there anything left to do about this, or can we close this bug?