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: move_it_vertically_backward question Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 11:27:36 +0200 Message-ID: <83zgox7xmf.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87lf0pw78r.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <83lf0nl56t.fsf@gnu.org> <875yrrtiwj.fsf@yahoo.com> <837dc7l2pa.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilvqty24.fsf@yahoo.com> <8335muj8zk.fsf@gnu.org> <87h7bang3d.fsf@yahoo.com> <83mtl1j527.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgp1mldh.fsf@yahoo.com> <83tuf9gdg5.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmpwkikp.fsf@yahoo.com> <83mtl0hnm5.fsf@gnu.org> <87czlwkfpk.fsf@yahoo.com> <8735mskal2.fsf@yahoo.com> <83ee6che8h.fsf@gnu.org> <87y24kisgf.fsf@yahoo.com> <838rwkhcqb.fsf@gnu.org> <87r1achulq.fsf@yahoo.com> <83pmpub41v.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmptbeii.fsf@yahoo.com> <8335mp9evn.fsf@gnu.org> <877dc19cpc.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10544"; 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 Sun Dec 19 10:28:33 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 1mysUa-0002Zt-AR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 10:28:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35340 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mysUY-0006hc-LV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 04:28:30 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58842) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mysTr-00062z-D4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 04:27:47 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=56832 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 1mysTr-0005UX-44; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 04:27:47 -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=g9l4nWYxTthospLhhgS7MdPMq4IOM8lzpBSPHIJ1HcY=; b=B5OC63f6eEuh 9DTNP0WlPyFjC37C4xa4A9QoSZ7wKWZzSAI0lKMZ8pD/O9ydVdmVCj1c/9qUpDrFEFxZlr+Tmg3uF w1PAZKvUPpkb61EiEz7h+AloLbvqAcHxcMb0LNlVxp4HnimYtUZLrBI47Kvg/zo1ySDL7cn09Y5Wf rVdXMbq5jD4ZXJN4AvOei0i1sR2akJgrtRB50oeOFBS3c1UnDfSvXp6QmF36VaxhRX1z1QOdFe9u4 V/RmvdJjzgTf104lL0KyR0CSfolmwGIsrlP411171E3ZrFhCrWJtYZZ8GtczywNm/Yzq/wUqvWCRb 1tHugZNw6MR0hhkaavq7NA==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3583 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 1mysTq-0001cG-Q6; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 04:27:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: <877dc19cpc.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Sun, 19 Dec 2021 17:16:31 +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:282390 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 17:16:31 +0800 > > > When window-start is inside a display property or overlay (i.e., the > > first thing shown in the window is the result of that display > > property/overlay), starting from the underlying buffer position will > > almost definitely affect the results, because that buffer position > > could be at a very different position on the screen. For example, > > what happens if window-start position has a before-string, and that > > string has a 'display' property specifying an image? This should > > display the image as the first display element at the window > > beginning, and the buffer position of window-start will then be to the > > right and possibly also at a different Y coordinate. > > Hmm, perhaps that condition should be removed in this case then. Not sure I understand what condition did you allude to here, and how did you propose to remove it.