From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Mac port Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:19:07 +0300 Message-ID: <838tupi0s4.fsf@gnu.org> 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> <57DEC995.9030006@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1474219185 3147 195.159.176.226 (18 Sep 2016 17:19:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 17:19:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 18 19:19:41 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 1blfkU-00078R-7K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:19:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50955 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfkS-0003yz-FJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:19:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48622) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfkI-0003wG-SS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:19:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfkE-0004Uf-Mk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:19:13 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:52237) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blfkE-0004UE-Ik; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:19:10 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4540 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1blfkA-0001cU-M7; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:19:09 -0400 In-reply-to: <57DEC995.9030006@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:06:29 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:207569 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:06:29 +0200 > From: martin rudalics > CC: mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > 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. So basically, no matter what is the value of frame-resize-pixelwise, we behave the same on Windows? If so, I think we deprive users of the flexibility to experience the other behavior, however unimportant it may seem, and that is IMO a pity. > >> 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 Because that's what manuals are about: bothering users with the details of how the software works. Those who don't want to read, don't have to.