From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#43572: Feature request: make it possible to choose whether the first lines of the minibuffer should be displayed instead of the last ones Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:41:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: <83h7rov7xy.fsf@gnu.org> <837dskuvx3.fsf@gnu.org> <833637uubc.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Gregory Heytings Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35023"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (NEB 394 2020-01-19) Cc: 43572@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 24 16:42:17 2020 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 1kLSRt-00093Z-Sk for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:42:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50450 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kLSRs-0000A8-Vf for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:42:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34544) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kLSRe-00009g-2A for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:42:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57883) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kLSRd-0005yq-Oc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:42:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kLSRd-0002R6-N2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:42:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Gregory Heytings Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 43572 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 43572-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B43572.16009585179351 (code B ref 43572); Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:42:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 43572) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Sep 2020 14:41:57 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41196 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kLSRY-0002Ql-Nl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:41:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:54456) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kLSRT-0002QU-OX for 43572@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:41:55 -0400 Original-Received: from sdf.org (IDENT:ghe@otaku.sdf.org [205.166.94.8]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 08OEfoK5003341 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:41:50 GMT Original-Received: (from ghe@localhost) by sdf.org (8.15.2/8.12.8/Submit) id 08OEg739008164; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:42:07 GMT In-Reply-To: <833637uubc.fsf@gnu.org> 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:188861 Archived-At: >>>> I can't think of such unintended consequences. In the use case of >>>> displaying completion candidates, this (the fact that it affects all >>>> successive calls to resize_mini_window) is indeed what is wanted. >>> >>> Well, I _can_ think of such consequences. As I said, >>> resize_mini_window is called in many situations that don't involve >>> completion, so setting that variable to affect all of them is a bad >>> idea. We need something more fine-grained if we want to implement >>> such a feature. >>> >> >> It would be very helpful if you could clarify what the consequences you >> think of are. > > Just grep the sources for the callers of resize_mini_window, and you > will see what I mean. > I did this. There are only seven calls to resize_mini_window(). > > It is not safe to avoid affecting them using the techniques you propose. > Could you please provide a recipe which would demonstrate a problem with the technique I propose? AFAICS, the flag is reset immediately when read_minibuf() / read-from-minibuffer has ended.