From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ralf Angeli Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: display-mm-width return value off on Windows Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 19:54:03 +0200 Message-ID: <874pw86284.fsf@neutrino.caeruleus.net> References: <44E73CD6.80207@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1156010090 18461 80.91.229.2 (19 Aug 2006 17:54:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 17:54:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 19 19:54:48 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GEV1o-00018a-Ef for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 19:54:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GEV1n-0006Ih-W3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 13:54:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GEV1d-0006HN-Gw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 13:54:25 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GEV1Z-0006By-6f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 13:54:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GEV1Y-0006Bl-UP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 13:54:20 -0400 Original-Received: from [212.227.126.177] (helo=moutng.kundenserver.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GEV8U-0000Iq-Vb; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 14:01:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [84.165.30.208] (helo=neutrino.caeruleus.net) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu4) with ESMTP (Nemesis), id 0ML21M-1GEV1K3zeU-0005xj; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 19:54:07 +0200 Original-To: Jason Rumney In-Reply-To: <44E73CD6.80207@gnu.org> (Jason Rumney's message of "Sat, 19 Aug 2006 17:31:18 +0100") X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de login:abf9ffac21f8345504ac40c53d3b40ba 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:58525 Archived-At: * Jason Rumney (2006-08-19) writes: > Ralf Angeli wrote: >>> I provided a patch for w32fns.c the majority of developers were in >>> favor of >> Okay, it's been two weeks and nobody has reacted to the last message. >> > I didn't react the first time because I don't think your statement above > was true, but it is pointless continuing the argument. Then we have a different perception of the reactions. > In response to the objections to your original patch (which gave > improved but still incorrect results on one machine, different but just > as incorrect results on another, I guess, I was the only one who actually checked the results of `display-mm-width' and `display-mm-height' with the final patch applied. Here they are again for reference: display-mm-* display-mm-* Real size without patch with patch Width 285mm 370 296 Height 215mm 277 222 I'd say this is a vast improvement. Until now nobody showed any evidence that the patch leads to more inaccurate results on other machines compared to the current code. > and according to the documentation for > the system calls involved could likely give worse results in many > circumstances), you produced a patch to allow the user to fix up > incorrect display size/dpi settings, but others pointed out that users > of multiple displays could be worse off with such a patch. So have you > given up on that and returned to trying to get your original patch accepted? No, I haven't given up on that. I modified the patch for frame.el for it to be able to cope with multiple displays and provided it in . Nobody replied to this message. I provided that patch (again) together with the patch for w32fns.c in . -- Ralf