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: [PATCH] Renaming non-X x_* identifiers Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 21:43:19 +0300 Message-ID: <83y34bgldk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wokp4okn.fsf@gmail.com> <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> <831s2nhza8.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0lpvq6n.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <83r2a5keo7.fsf@gnu.org> <87pnppu4ox.fsf@gmail.com> <83muktk9xb.fsf@gnu.org> <875zrhtg2i.fsf@gmail.com> <83ftqkk7lr.fsf@gnu.org> <877ebwvatg.fsf@gmail.com> <83y34cin3g.fsf@gnu.org> <87y34ctrs1.fsf@gmail.com> <83h8azianr.fsf@gnu.org> <87r2a3jh5h.fsf@gmail.com> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="256971"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: alan@idiocy.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alex Gramiak Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 15 20:43:46 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 1hG6Zz-0014gE-Gv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:43:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54271 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hG6Zy-000847-7Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 14:43:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58732) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hG6Zm-00083q-J2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 14:43:31 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:33423) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hG6Zm-0001mx-34; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 14:43:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2887 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hG6Zl-00065T-27; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 14:43:29 -0400 In-reply-to: <87r2a3jh5h.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Alex Gramiak on Mon, 15 Apr 2019 11:46:18 -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:235495 Archived-At: > From: Alex Gramiak > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, alan@idiocy.org > Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 11:46:18 -0600 > > Is it okay that I left the get_focus_frame hook in do_switch_frame > (frame.c) unchecked? It's enclosed by a FRAME_WINDOW_P, so a comment > in termhooks.c mandating that window systems implement that hook > should be sufficient, no? On the other hand, it's the only one > remaining in the generic code that's left unchecked. Yes, and we have others in the same situations which _are_ tested, for example: if (FRAME_WINDOW_P (f) && FRAME_TERMINAL (f)->frame_visible_invisible_hook) FRAME_TERMINAL (f)->frame_visible_invisible_hook (f, true); So I think we should do the same with get_focus_frame hook as well. > Are there any other issues to discuss, besides the comments in > termhooks.h (which I'll work on soon)? Have you tested this branch on > w32 to check if I missed anything there? I didn't yet try the to build the branch, no. I will try soon if no one beats me to it. After you finish the comments, let's wait for a few days so people could try the branch. Thanks.