From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Mac port Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:06:29 +0200 Message-ID: <57DEC995.9030006@gmx.at> References: <57DE4306.6060904@gmx.at> <57DE4D33.6070201@gmx.at> <57DE63EC.3010305@gmx.at> <83h99di7uq.fsf@gnu.org> <57DEAF9E.1010709@gmx.at> <83bmzli5b7.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1474218428 469 195.159.176.226 (18 Sep 2016 17:07:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 17:07:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 18 19:07:03 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1blfYO-0007MX-R4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:06:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50927 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfYN-0001GB-3J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:06:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46304) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfYG-0001FY-32 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:06:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfY9-00066H-Vr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:06:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:56318) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfY9-00065Z-Kn; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:06:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([212.95.7.68]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LaGfK-1bHJcA2b8w-00m5mE; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:06:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: <83bmzli5b7.fsf@gnu.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:LMoV1BXw+r3DfWOR7qWgksATMLJNZ7yl7VIgQ2uI/yI9iM5hy0y KFsWotmpT6t0Ts0o7DWaAvcSgbSltqPMFkYxb6bkO2/SGqclsJTUg2IrUrlZPL/mMTz/lBh NKKs+4RsYLp9WUjLwNP9Bewk/H9HAldRX/anAa6JCXN59RWEaFFW0ZK6r56hDzbGKz8i785 azRnOzr7GFtwhTxgZYoaQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:aDmZLo+9KyU=:SHKJ2hQjFYfoyFDPenHL27 52trziw4ZL302fDyN3xbhM1/M+uWhImSQULh6FM2DD32fnDwjpGMYBwpg44HLR/mt481c3dXs rw5wxOM9YKM1h8XqwK0CnWZBpOx2j6I01JwUOb7vA3z5yVpqDT7GsyyZ22GRK4Jg8T06wcxro z1fjD8t/U01YespS/Q8VPDi8QYvHwnk8QdElZSfdb8o433dK1HUtRA2ooEwNdYJHeuiuVhc8E lBFOhtxF8p59fLXGJvh1+O0y+6lXrKpO3sGeqyGAAM/CtxuuiEvLkU6RMt5lMvrP43Fw4yuOy SzcoRponWHSXmH4w/fzQ+dfQZZgNvNziV2hs/QajRT4Dz6HiuQ/rKAwzmg7c7Sdev3XaKenAd ya/eaouG2vCoaDd3CYIpPzKI0a9OPW1w4VvyYELjHIs0bXZP3jKDnyKruO+voOaoy1FX5tlt/ jrXLtE2TH528gg4/Cq6yw05XGem9S6Q1hxD5ZJZ561ubWh4VGiFRRsCccL72GKAJY1vO+cRaD /t3q5sW01ztHwUbBO064y++jbXjIYDN12oOJDXjNteCH4Ly8U3XFxf5B14+1Q4ErfVZ2G4IWO OM5UGFGoJTp7Us0I8uKuWJKSriZHELXRCipGxLERIqPxmoNwtaz5GHdnD6CJ9Pw32TfkXGd/B amt+CmtmK1S4JzLMO6q8vxM3/VpglwwuDNBm6RSoWgqsISdjb6PPGLFoGPciqLFWqqQgS5h9h BhEA+jrTO2bZ7a3id1UcZngspkDs3v8ARdPiFWGuMcEo8z7zsNV60zUWuYjfCRvwL5oDknvO X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:207568 Archived-At: > I'm asking why it is wrong to do that in newer versions, as long as > frame-resize-pixelwise is nil. Because we want to give users a nice experience, by default. > Especially since we behave like that > on other systems. The "other systems" have window managers that do support size hints. Windows doesn't. We can not tell Windows where to draw the desired shape of the frame. Basically, our Windows code does not behave differently from X code at all: Emacs simply respects the requested size. If it didn't on Windows - that is, if we applied some character size based rounding - we would immediately get Aero Snap requests wrong which may ask, for example, to have a window occupy the left or right half of the screen. We cannot distinguish whether any such request is the result of dragging a frame edge with the mouse or that of an Aero routine. >> > (Is it even documented?) >> >> Look up `frame-resize-pixelwise' in the Elisp manual. > > But frame resizing by dragging by a mouse is a user-visible feature, > not only for Lisp programmers. Why bother users with something that works out of the box and without a single complaint over the past years? The one and only problem users had so far is that of window managers trying to maximize frames characterwise and failing miserably. That problem is addressed in the user manual. martin