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: Some testing issues Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 09:46:10 +0200 Message-ID: <5961DF42.5020000@gmx.at> References: <8737a8j61r.fsf@rosalinde> <59608730.3050308@gmx.at> <87y3rznfrj.fsf@rosalinde> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1499586423 5949 195.159.176.226 (9 Jul 2017 07:47:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 07:47:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stephen Berman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 09 09:46:57 2017 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 1dU6ve-00017v-Hs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 09:46:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35233 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dU6vk-0003Rq-3F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 03:47:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44604) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dU6v9-0003Rc-JT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 03:46:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dU6v4-0000Lu-Ma for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 03:46:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:58808) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dU6v4-0000KE-Bl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 03:46:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([213.162.68.7]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MHX0m-1dXOhv038G-003KPd; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 09:46:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87y3rznfrj.fsf@rosalinde> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:t7gqEdKnx4QByRsHljRg1wF/G7XeukuA76bAfBspNl68adaS6TM hp2NngO60Ea1oZ8mcKUBOivve5tFObI7YYkRxX6tPGD7dgdkpPOmchiqH2+iKzubrt+bTEV Pm35qQIevD9g3PSOEEn3GQ6HCsn/SHjwhC496lmd8xhGR44r/jVpKk7ZjPX1bhhcZFWlkuL N6VqOnwH/T03nfDmFkx5Q== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:rZ7nmR9sjYI=:hcoCv8dOEkSV74MyaHB6CV 0YtYrYqCUedMJOF2SqTFeT8WIU/u/DPYxMAhJOtpPuO3GdEcW+duk9MSL8Xtd4roGBDgLUcl0 xStbLaeq7hRcxQVO+0wH0JT8BKZX5hRt+50JAomP8P16RrsWpMq+eUSnF/cRU0RndzhbQb4Df UOqWwS0wDvpyjOzscLgOaq7rUE3kBIT84JMfHOeoNdJ8e7cc0rU7QpQQOHP8Pr74G/SEt0kvj 8QSXheN9kYa9H8nKoD4MPwhD1JEe9ggEtIVsiSbh/kf+O3bugCm/z4j1QMUMUwE0Z/CXsttbz 1uTEWKUJXfH7p7fMT+uxsLltAOkwKm6oSG/AMZVxRCFL7O6oF9/MDuzVcBUHUPJ2dlOpSc4oB ePRonAEXXFEsU7BTsEJStTBWz5tz9VYgV6o13MsI8eAtc27IjEor10CtzDugMNSzwpU2E+73i xFIpPI9a8uFJXSMr88cWpPud6U8h9jgvrlWA0ieNHrHeCQOU9MuyFFXaIn1A1bEMkq8m4haoR 0rwjaQycNpaVa+8ZuB5hPPr9MN5i49lpJbL1rM/WIh8gZZybDl6v+ChrscYT1rx0CVbZ4etSb VvS30JNFNuw1hI9/v3jqLpVNG6uFurS1jzN7zrwQ9yzupeHlpioE84GLRZ9kSLi41GqWfOhnG iYIk6u/UzYjrI540TbrMw2v3iGzj1EYtyn9esZoQTV/qgN9yNMOgzeuz0pku0cYMMRWjCY7M4 pNRzf5nwlF1pmBnuA+odyFAoXWbAF1h9Z6ospyP6RcBwf/Gz9QVHDQwfnSY1VuVY/Munfbx2 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.18 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:216353 Archived-At: > True, though when I step through the code in the interactive test, the= > condition (pos-visible-in-window-p shown) is true, so recenter is not > called; so the question to me is why this is not the case in the batch= run. =E2=80=98pos-visible-in-window-p=E2=80=99 is specified as DEFUN ("pos-visible-in-window-p", Fpos_visible_in_window_p, ... Lisp_Object in_window =3D Qnil; ... return in_window; so if none of the conditions it checks succeeds, it will return nil. > Thanks for clarifying that for me. I guess I'll have to leave such > features untested, or is there an alternative? You can wrap them in a (skip-unless (display-graphic-p)) which means that they are allowed to fail in interactive use only. martin