From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Allowing point to be outside the window? Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:04:07 +0200 Message-ID: <83fsoqub3s.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87ilwd7zaq.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <87lf0xjgxu.fsf@yahoo.com> <83ilw0zg38.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtlbgajq.fsf@yahoo.com> <83czm7vx0s.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtlad3sv.fsf@yahoo.com> <83mtlaurxj.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsqh9o7s.fsf@yahoo.com> <878ruoqx0u.fsf@yahoo.com> <83h79cz0sm.fsf@gnu.org> <87leyonrp4.fsf@yahoo.com> <83fsowyzt9.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmo0mbig.fsf@yahoo.com> <8335kwynrp.fsf@gnu.org> <87y22nlbdg.fsf@yahoo.com> <87v8xri1ki.fsf@yahoo.com> <83fsouyetj.fsf@gnu.org> <871r0eg4o1.fsf@yahoo.com> <83a6f2ycsx.fsf@gnu.org> <877da6dvip.fsf@yahoo.com> <83bkzhwak6.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8xo3ip2.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18106"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 10 17:47:24 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nICbM-0004Pd-Ee for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 17:47:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38782 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nICbK-0006Cv-ON for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 11:47:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38324) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nI97N-0003Lt-GX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:04:17 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=55296 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nI97M-0004oL-Up; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:04:13 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=8hDHWR70KCO9tktd6sritFWhuOTpJpFoj0sHkWIg4g8=; b=Y1HM+LYeGSO7 +2oNeU1vZnR0imq5VeOEJsQUUnjOXLSJEkyUBQNGgZwSb0vgdp7nsK1oS2r667Fm473ykMynq/nn9 lkK5qEOU32cWTV+N1/cvpIz3KeDDfrw93OphR5qFU3XfoLlNBuK3OJMRT6SWSwc40PIgbkjxF6Asj 3gt/QDsLg9j4WmirRNo21Imlfi7Ze7wgc6X8SkX8ZAfi/mPYd4Lwg+1MnHUNrCa8lWWDzkiMbQXez wlwlaXIHNPvmPMC3xcxAIY08Mv68IafsPeXJp/xoGvWAT/5H0v6Wrb7wfV3gZErBg6j/Fd+4xtdG3 C2tDVWijctQOcVoG5pBCkw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3990 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nI97M-0002qa-0d; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:04:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87v8xo3ip2.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Wed, 09 Feb 2022 09:57:45 +0800) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:286143 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2022 09:57:45 +0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > I don't think you can do that indiscriminately, because some of the > > places that set the window's force_start flag are unrelated to this > > feature. One example is set_window_buffer and its callers. Another > > example is the code in redisplay_window that ends with "goto > > force_start". And there are probably more. > > > > So if you want to do that, you'll need to carefully audit all those > > places, and make sure you avoid moving point only when force_start was > > set by scrolling commands or in some similar situations. Otherwise, > > users will complain that point goes out of view when they didn't > > expect it to. For example, "C-x 2" goes through that code, and I'm > > quite sure we don't want point to be left outside of the window in > > that case. > > Would it make sense to introduce a new flag that split-window-below and > other such commands set that makes force_start move point regardless of > the value of `keep-point-visible'? Commands cannot bind variables to force redisplay do something, because redisplay runs when the command already exited. So what you mean is probably a flag in the window object. Is that the intent?