From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Code cleanup -- inconsistent "width" and "height" etc. Date: 11 Apr 2003 02:08:32 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xbrzddhfj.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> References: <5xhe97dsr3.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <5xptnuihqd.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <200304101210.VAA17569@etlken.m17n.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1050012767 27940 80.91.224.249 (10 Apr 2003 22:12:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:12:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 11 00:12:42 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 193kHi-0007GO-00 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:12:42 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 193kMs-0004iV-00 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:18:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 193kFt-0007bQ-0B for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:10:49 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 193kFC-00076w-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:10:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 193kF8-00072P-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:10:02 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 193kF0-0006z3-00; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:09:54 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EAA47C012; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:09:53 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Kenichi Handa In-Reply-To: <200304101210.VAA17569@etlken.m17n.org> Original-Lines: 26 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 Original-cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:13123 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:13123 Kenichi Handa writes: > In article <5xptnuihqd.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk>, storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > > Alternatively, we could use *_COLS in general as a short precise name > > when the width is measured in columns (the canonical X unit). > > Similarly, we could use *_LINES for heights measured in lines (the > > canonical Y unit). > > > If we do that consistently, we could simply use *_WIDTH and *_HEIGHT to > > mean pixel width and height. > > But, as I wrote, Lisp APIs are already using > ...-width/...-height for columns and lines. Even if we > implement pixel-base APIs in the future, we can't change the > current ones, then we'll use ...-pixel-width...-pixel-height > for the new APIs. In that case, having a different > convention in C code is not good. So there is no hope of cleaning up the current mess ? How can we ever make progress towards removing the column/lines limitation on frame and window dimensions if we cannot find a way to clean up the current naming mess? -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk