From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Renaming non-X x_* procedures in xdisp.c (and elsewhere) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 17:52:15 +0300 Message-ID: <831s2nhza8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wokp4okn.fsf@gmail.com> <83ef6xpo6b.fsf@gnu.org> <0f4be9a6-6e09-f55d-9f58-2a15aef264cd@cs.ucla.edu> <837ecpplw8.fsf@gnu.org> <871s2w510a.fsf@gmail.com> <922F9B91-2E9E-45F6-BB96-66CAE5E9FB81@gnu.org> <87k1goqpnn.fsf@gmail.com> <83imw8nspc.fsf@gnu.org> <87ftrcqg5j.fsf@gmail.com> <83bm20nm62.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0men4jx.fsf@gmail.com> <83o95sisk7.fsf@gnu.org> <87mulcnui4.fsf@gmail.com> <83bm1si7lf.fsf@gnu.org> <87ef6ont03.fsf@gmail.com> <83a7hci44l.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7hcndtc.fsf@gmail.com> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="129389"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alex Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 31 16:52:55 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hAbpP-000XYl-AD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 16:52:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36162 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAbpO-0005w7-Bd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:52:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51888) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAbog-0005vp-Jr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:52:11 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:56958) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAbof-0000HG-V9; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:52:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1763 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hAboe-0004k1-K2; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:52:09 -0400 In-reply-to: <87a7hcndtc.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Alex on Sat, 30 Mar 2019 17:27:11 -0600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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:234839 Archived-At: > From: Alex > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 17:27:11 -0600 > > >> > Not sure what you mean by "terminal hooks". They all accept a pointer > >> > to a frame, no? > >> > >> I meant being used through a function pointer in the terminal struct > >> rather than in the redisplay_interface struct. > > > > Are you talking about the arguments these functions receive now? If > > so, which ones specifically get terminal struct pointers? > > Sorry for not being clear -- by "being terminal hooks" I meant being put > in the definition of the terminal struct (in termhooks.h), rather than > the redisplay_interface struct in dispextern.h. That is, being used like > FRAME_TERMINAL (f)->some_hook rather than FRAME_RIF (f)->procedure. I don't really mind, if using FRAME_TERMINAL doesn't mean more complications on the source level.