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: "Final" version of tty child frames Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:01:59 +0300 Message-ID: <86ttd4ftvs.fsf@gnu.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13671"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 22 10:02:54 2024 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 1t39qw-0003Mh-C3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 10:02:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t39q8-0000xX-UO; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 04:02:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t39q7-0000xJ-AF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 04:02:03 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t39q6-0005lh-VA; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 04:02:02 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=hnszK/sFsrZ4SRvh5yXnfqLtJGGatNOLZhhnRNA9lRg=; b=HB7ZLYpL1qTYwxGilt2g 7pdE53ZRLHI8UGapVSiK4nnt971E5MKunidhqe35qMCMXtStdHH5neD5LN/CdeMLY0GJMCSu9ubub QbURbuvC0B978tyYEDtvIhDyJbbOFLpQDfNVYr33cbSZGDnJ6t+WJVZlM84kgr1V3HDLUrnJYTnku rcuCc5E/Kou5hHlZldWcoDUkoCnTGZr9le/zeOtK9njpOyWJapr6M8vPb1f3OHwr5rcU1K453pE8Y OMWKnNYN/ngTF+Dctc89vzpqqeMku4eJqjM1pDXHxdr/qmBX1pAbIQ9VP/yfUXfqv8u4KbFazyFoP JXNN/ZGL6ieicg==; In-Reply-To: (message from Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=B6llmann?= on Tue, 22 Oct 2024 06:46:15 +0200) 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:324721 Archived-At: > From: Gerd Möllmann > Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 06:46:15 +0200 > > I have (re-)created the scratch/tty-child-frames branch today, which > contains the code for child frames on ttys, based on a recent master. > > I'm a happy user of this for a while now with corfu, vertico + > vertico-posframe + consult, transient + transient-posframe, > which-key + which-key-posframe. And my current todo list is now empty, > so here it is. Is there a way to test the feature without using corfu? If so, can you suggest some simple Lisp to see if the child frames work in a build of this branch? > Disclaimer: As I mentioned already in other contexts, I don't want to > be the maintainer of anything, for personal reasons. > > Have fun! Does this compile cleanly for you? I get gobs of warnings like this: dispnew.c: In function ‘gui_update_window_end’: dispnew.c:4495:34: warning: potential null pointer dereference [-Wnull-dereference] 4495 | hlinfo->mouse_face_beg_row = hlinfo->mouse_face_beg_col = -1; | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This seems to be because you've changed the definition of MOUSE_HL_INFO to be this: # define MOUSE_HL_INFO(F) \ (FRAME_WINDOW_P (F) \ ? (FRAME_OUTPUT_DATA (F) \ ? &FRAME_DISPLAY_INFO (F)->mouse_highlight \ : NULL) \ : &(F)->output_data.tty->display_info->mouse_highlight) I don't understand the need for this NULL there. What is its purpose, and what will we lose by going back to the original definition? I believe that NULL is what's causing these warnings. Thanks.