From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Avoid recentering when user says so Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:52:46 +0200 Message-ID: <83oc4xslpt.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83r59tsoos.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1301169950 1327 80.91.229.12 (26 Mar 2011 20:05:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 20:05:50 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 26 21:05:44 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q3Zk0-0005Qg-5A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:05:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34436 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q3ZYA-0003aM-60 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:53:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52597 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q3ZXe-0000G1-8f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:53:26 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q3ZXQ-0003bS-WD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:52:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:40733) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q3ZXQ-0003bB-J7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:52:44 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LIO00B00KGV5500@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:52:42 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.47.180]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LIO00ADKKJSPDA0@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:52:41 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <83r59tsoos.fsf@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.175 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:137725 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 20:48:35 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > > Following the latest discussions in that bug report, I came up with a > way to solve this problem without incurring unduly slow movement far > away in the buffer. The patch below seems to give good results Btw, in the discussions related to bug #6671, some people said that Emacs should pay attention to the value of another variable, scroll-preserve-screen-position, when Emacs decides where to put point after moving it to a far away location. I would like to point out that this option has nothing to do with the issue at hand, although its name might suggest that it does. This option is only examined by the scroll-up and scroll-down commands, which are just one way of scrolling. No other command ever looks at this option. (Documentation seem to suggest that any command that has non-nil scroll-command property will also behave according to this option, but unless I'm missing something, I cannot see how that could be true.) Therefore, the patch I proposed does not consult this option at all.