From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7296: display-pixel-height not enough Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:24:37 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83hbg66vt4.fsf@gnu.org> <83d3qt77lj.fsf@gnu.org> <4CCA9E5D.5060002@swipnet.se> <838w1h6zbp.fsf@gnu.org> <4CCAC90B.4070800@swipnet.se> <4CCB2713.5070104@swipnet.se> <4CCBC930.5060705@swipnet.se> <2EDD5E782A7C473C875477D2F2A4B743@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1288711104 11042 80.91.229.12 (2 Nov 2010 15:18:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 15:18:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 7296@debbugs.gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 02 16:18:19 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PDIcd-0001uO-4g for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 16:18:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34304 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PDIXi-0006qO-Dl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 11:12:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37185 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PDI5A-0006sn-Cj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:44:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PDI55-00028M-Sr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:43:24 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:48787) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PDI55-00028G-Qz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:43:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PDHjS-00086n-H2; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:21:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 14:21:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7296 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 7296-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7296.128870761831160 (code B ref 7296); Tue, 02 Nov 2010 14:21:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7296) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Nov 2010 14:20:18 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PDHik-00086X-KJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:20:18 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PDHij-00086Q-Dw for 7296@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:20:18 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id oA2EOb1E000660; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:24:37 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 39FA9B4500; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:24:37 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <2EDD5E782A7C473C875477D2F2A4B743@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Mon, 1 Nov 2010 08:09:20 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3666=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:21:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:41367 Archived-At: >> In what way can the working display area size in pixels be >> incompatible? And why is using the current total display area size >> better (and more compatible)? > It's not that one or the other is better; it's that they > are different. Indeed, and it goes even further: if someone cares about the workarea enough to want to know its height and width, she may also want to know its *position* on the screen. So I'm not sure convinced that adding display-pixel-work-height and display-pixel-work-width would be sufficient either. Stefan