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: Tick Reduction Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 17:10:56 +0200 Message-ID: <83zgps46f3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87bl2hyzca.fsf@gnus.org> <87v90khaa8.fsf@gnus.org> <83zgpwp7v2.fsf@gnu.org> <87tug4fdn7.fsf@gnus.org> <83pmqsp0m7.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0gzyy8k.fsf@gnus.org> <835ysjoupv.fsf@gnu.org> <8735nnyob1.fsf@gnus.org> <83y25fneeh.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqrx7rh.fsf@gnus.org> <83tug3ndaj.fsf@gnu.org> <874k81vmlf.fsf@gnus.org> <83sfvl8wjw.fsf@gnu.org> <87o869y0v2.fsf@gnus.org> <83fsrl8owz.fsf@gnu.org> <87o869wkcx.fsf@gnus.org> <83bl298n9b.fsf@gnu.org> <8735nlwih6.fsf@gnus.org> <837dcx8kkn.fsf@gnu.org> <87czmofl3z.fsf@gnus.org> <83ee745ppw.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl28cnrj.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36827"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 25 16:23:04 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 1mqGaW-0009Ja-4U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 25 Nov 2021 16:23:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48850 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mqGaU-0002W3-2J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 25 Nov 2021 10:23:02 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38278) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mqGOx-0007dx-Sl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Nov 2021 10:11:07 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=44604 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 1mqGOn-0002SV-1W; Thu, 25 Nov 2021 10:11:07 -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=tiAjdeiF/bRo2sscrP3bs2pRWLXZBBzEw3UZlEyOu6Y=; b=lZyOSX34p21M wy5z1USeQHLIaMm8o6qgzmc1rBU9rnMNp29N1lxRk7toLpZ9Gvu42LcGfzn96hG/IqFRcrjfyHsW2 dFuxhXK1GehI5AmaW/Yr0b9XM6nn+WEpfxq4dcCV5191wwOSqvf2T8m3GfuV+4oH9wKBh1shiQgYa egvFLIf6LJqGJ3zG5u2vkgwug9Smexz3WipSdexBm/9GhfHg8IhL9aU+K2paqx0z70LdF6R5LbQ7+ 4eqrspaIXwa40XybhMGo5sLnVRXzpfhELh1NjEnRfPNrGyzB9AY3p6dwzT6JvdWHwAJFc0b5yLrW4 0teYkTn9idFl5T3Wr0mJjA==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=1426 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 1mqGOk-0005N3-CC; Thu, 25 Nov 2021 10:10:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87bl28cnrj.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Thu, 25 Nov 2021 15:29:04 +0100) 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:280141 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 15:29:04 +0100 > > > But "is over" seems to mean "we are in the next string", not "we are > > at the end of the string that needs to be stretched". that's what the > > bufpos == 0 test does. Right? If so, this is too late: what if > > there's no "next string"? > > If there's no "next string" we have nothing to stretch for, so that's > fine. Yes, we do: the last string. The padding of a string should not depend on whether there's another string after it. The padding is a display feature: if some Lisp puts the property on a string, that string should look the same, with the same padding, regardless of where on the screen it is located, and regardless of whether there's some text after it. > (If we want to extend the face over the stretch, then this has to be > done differently.) Which face? This feature is not about faces, it is about padding text so that it takes at least X pixels on display. > > ??? The "foo" part has the display property, so it is that something > > which needs to be stretched. That there's some more text after it > > shouldn't affect how "foo" is displayed, right? Or what am I missing? > > The stretch comes after "foo", so I'm not sure what you're asking. I'm asking why the stretch isn't produced when there's nothing but EOB after "foo". I expect to see the stretch between the end of "foo" and EOB.