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: New Context Menu Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 09:53:17 +0300 Message-ID: <83o89rz3tu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87zgtciom8.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83a6lc1hnz.fsf@gnu.org> <20210820122605.bewzngxm3w73yuif@Ergus> <834kbk1eem.fsf@gnu.org> <20210820130304.7dv3umwlvrnngaxw@Ergus> <8335r41bqn.fsf@gnu.org> <20210820173637.efw6y7zl4j7dbgif@Ergus> <83wnogyost.fsf@gnu.org> <20210820180805.hozyplizjgbw5voc@Ergus> <83v940ylxu.fsf@gnu.org> <20210821062047.djoaxquzelrbbnch@Ergus> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5958"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net To: Ergus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 21 08:54:24 2021 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 1mHKtc-0001KP-KV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 08:54:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58388 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mHKtb-0003qA-8M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 02:54:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57024) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mHKsk-0003BZ-Gu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 02:53:30 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37754) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mHKsj-00051N-Rf; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 02:53:29 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3370 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 1mHKsj-0001yN-EZ; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 02:53:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20210821062047.djoaxquzelrbbnch@Ergus> (message from Ergus on Sat, 21 Aug 2021 08:20:47 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:272765 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 08:20:47 +0200 > From: Ergus > Cc: juri@linkov.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > 1) In a gui clicking (fast) mouse-X produces 2 events + > and emacs translates them to + -> > when they are fast enough. > > 2) In a gui, holding mouse-X produces 1 event and after a > small delay emacs processes the event, so releasing the button after > that delay is seen as an independent event . In this case there > are two events and they are not merged as in 1. > > 3) In xterm, clicking (fast) mouse-X produces 2 events as well > + but emacs does not translate them; that means > that is processed (shows the menu) and then is > also processes (hides the menu and selects). > > 4) In xterm, holding mouse-X and the releasing after a while is exactly > the same as 3). > > So as I said before, in xterm emacs does not use such a delay on tui, it > needs to be added or somehow provide a criteria to translate > + into when it is done fast enough. And why are these differences a problem? You may be unaware of the terrible complexity and the hoops we jump through to display menus on TTY frames, and to process mouse events on such frames in general, but I can assure you those complexities are real. It is a small surprise that given that, there are differences in how these are presented to Emacs.