From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#38181: Actual height of mode-line not taken into account Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 19:46:30 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87eeyd3ul0.fsf@bernoul.li> <83d0dt2qt6.fsf@gnu.org> <83r2290w24.fsf@gnu.org> <83pnhs6wwp.fsf@gnu.org> <878sofon8v.fsf@bernoul.li> <837e3z7pzo.fsf@gnu.org> <831ru77ghg.fsf@gnu.org> <9700fac4-b75d-cd6e-3360-78bd0f8c7db0@gmx.at> <83blta5sep.fsf@gnu.org> <5db0ddbf-7473-ca8e-8279-7f8435297771@gmx.at> <83tv724aav.fsf@gnu.org> <19634a53-d8a2-0e85-bfd8-2cd636c6ae3c@gmx.at> <838sod427o.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="126289"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: jonas@bernoul.li, 38181@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 18 19:52:21 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm8J-000Wcf-Mp for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 19:52:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38250 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm8I-0004j7-CG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:52:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40901) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm3E-0000bq-8w for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:47:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm3C-0002cU-Pn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:47:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37434) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm3C-0002cP-M8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:47:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm3C-0000eH-Ih for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:47:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 18:47:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 38181 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 38181-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B38181.15741028012458 (code B ref 38181); Mon, 18 Nov 2019 18:47:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 38181) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Nov 2019 18:46:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46254 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm2r-0000da-46 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:46:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:48283) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iWm2p-0000dO-4b for 38181@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:46:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1574102793; bh=Q5gjJmZjJqaaNDuLdFDT1qlqku4hknq17Rf2/EzqsUg=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=NkdCFdRbsGfD49IRny9MXc5yLs8/DgfRIP5nwaxUiJK09Ek5d5d1J4VdiBcd2wwYi danFMl6U57sf3434UfK0ZAadfUpK5V9e0K+V4acLVqOpu37exebs/ETmHS7Q69txVQ yWc1WpDUfkBknDMEDG43fk2eRfqZty61qkn88fQM= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from [192.168.1.103] ([212.95.5.110]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N33ET-1hs7C14A7p-013Jd6; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 19:46:33 +0100 In-Reply-To: <838sod427o.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Language: de-AT X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:IpduCTlbom+lX+bMtKXFk5yYcpiZ7OjQMxclhm2rc3rz6EEKWKe JAXRyvIKmQEi0X6oGtKV/mICDWgp4uERN9uvybhSYg+wSEjBk0KPYfg3Pv6ud8rvBl+nfbG suOhG5pQNd0ELpeTiheSZZp3kkCVXdhYemzaPLc7PXijm7ygr6FztO9EsaqHCzTZNB3DnBc 9eLIC3O17mDPH7Yg0xTLw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:aR+kxBKn1lg=:95RONF6q16G86gygWvn8Lm DMAhIPCiI+JUgPAEndpPapfVSb0cF9ivEjAg0KKVr87dUG7Ig3ZPbMXJonc+CfYJNoUixcC7Z eUjrBk6hEWJYQEij6pX3+zLnXXS3I0v+PzdusUrhChtZpbEjr4ax21gtH+74TuyhDgVAHQbLj onJxuUiavoLlFt4JammwqeZCxxgsQRHi5mOgh00amtYihJxVekVLB2nnn9UsEn0XQyIJ80y2V f/ehZjpLSWuCQznbEHlIXuCntX1J74ifKHQdyxsOk2AkSpnJJjQPlxYT5CmaMr7XEgWtP2DqE lP7qQQiw83EFMdzBjVwVU6Fg8ky84s/oZ1jgnQeBQk1Idm2kBXEfgPodaR7K3VgbIKYSBwe+z scF1GSyDmlX8DxpVEEhJWWQDNbYw+jhPJrJksS6MZbtXx7mZPS/PqpxXmcS9RHg1Giv/V0BYX 3jDQ1W90RxQmcb3S//Imxe4NgNoGx+PPWiseD0kpHxOziXmrkK8G86GNXV6VkECpghuh9yXg8 nFK3hrw1lbxrwws6agpE1ZFyUXu4ifdhN6iR7THoZKKKrYA/OI95g62ZfU6MH0OIsbC8Wo6zx xqVm828hIc2jCu9P5ZHrU0gD4BtuOFGu5Dl4Y0Nz67L4egOytxZdWxSlVvtkEB9zeEvg2XSIo EYnsK5gIsXIGBtBmtM1pNZBS4NVnThAOLbK/jHDQOZgO7n88m7b490FOdwyKSACjNacbDcBDu E2F6s1vi3UK43YsD/nl+aUlZsCjIjA+bVS6lgYYmRGN0o3U0q+gLOkN2gPUTKdWBz5OXwFXA 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: 209.51.188.43 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:171932 Archived-At: >> But IIUC in neither of our proposals we would have done that. > > I wouldn't be so sure: the code fragment I've shown that detects > mode-line height changes is inside redisplay_window. But we should collect evidence from all windows first before redisplaying again. >> I'd even say that we should resize windows when redisplay finds out >> that the mode line height has been increased and would obscure the >> window above, not leave at least one line of its window's text >> visible > > Some might dislike such side effects, I think, for the same reason > some dislike the resizing which happens due to mini-window growth. You probably misunderstood. I meant the example from my other mail where enlarging the mode line covers the entire text area of its window. In that case we sooner or later will resize anyway, that is when the window resizing code becomes aware of the fact. martin