From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Vivek Dasmohapatra Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22000: Patch addressing the menu-bar frame-resize interaction Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:32:05 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <87k2p8h1vn.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> <5B543148.1010004@gmx.at> <5B557ACA.4020106@gmx.at> <5BBF93CF.4060301@gmx.at> <5BC05EEB.9010609@gmx.at> <5BC0E405.90805@gmx.at> <5BC1AAE2.7070808@gmx.at> <5BC4DB0E.3050501@gmx.at> <5BC6E4F2.2030607@gmx.at> <5BC83F03.4050006@gmx.at> <83o9brqs6e.fsf@gnu.org> <83bm7rqfpo.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1539888108 32127 195.159.176.226 (18 Oct 2018 18:41:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 18:41:48 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Cc: 22000@debbugs.gnu.org, deng@randomsample.de To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 18 20:41:44 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 1gDDEt-0008Fa-Rv for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 20:41:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43861 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gDDH0-0005ZJ-DE for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:43:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39133) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gDD6X-0005y3-6B for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:33:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gDD6U-0007Yt-1w for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:33:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:53105) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gDD6T-0007Xs-T1 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:33:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gDD6T-00015p-Ji for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:33:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Vivek Dasmohapatra Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 18:33:01 +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=B22000.15398875304145 (code B ref 22000); Thu, 18 Oct 2018 18:33:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22000) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Oct 2018 18:32:10 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57363 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gDD5e-00014n-5Q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:32:10 -0400 Original-Received: from ceres.etla.org ([85.119.82.193]:35925) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gDD5d-00014g-8h for 22000@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:32:09 -0400 Original-Received: from yaffle.pepperfish.net ([88.99.213.221] helo=[10.112.101.20]) by ceres.etla.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gDD5b-0006up-IN; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:32:07 +0100 X-X-Sender: vivek@platypus.pepperfish.net In-Reply-To: <83bm7rqfpo.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "ceres.etla.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Sure, but why not have them literally, so that reading the doc string > in the code will also be easier. Like this: Oh, right! Sure, no problem. I vaguely recall some problem with docstring highlighting but that was years ago (sometime around emacs 19?). [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 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:151395 Archived-At: On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Sure, but why not have them literally, so that reading the doc string > in the code will also be easier. Like this: Oh, right! Sure, no problem. I vaguely recall some problem with docstring highlighting but that was years ago (sometime around emacs 19?).