Re: Renaming non-X x_* procedures in xdisp.c (and elsewhere)

[Alex <agrambot@gmail.com>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Maybe you are right.  How about making a list of those functions
> first?  When I looked at them, my impression was that most of them
> _are_ related to display, but maybe I was wrong.  We can decide once
> we see the list.

Alright, I got most of the grunt work done. There are three left in
xdisp.c:

** x_clear_under_internal_border
** x_change_tool_bar_height
** x_implicitly_set_name

Here are those called in frame.{c, h}

** x_set_scroll_bar_default_{width, height}
** x_set_frame_alpha
** x_bitmap_icon
** x_new_font
** x_set_offset
** x_set_window_size
** x_focus_frame
** x_make_frame_(in)visible
** x_iconify_frame

This one is called in image.c:
** x_query_color(s)

This one is called in keyboard.c:
** x_get_keysym_name

I'm not sure what purpose x_get_keysym_name serves (see the comment in
nsterm.m's implementation).

>> IMO it would be nicer to get rid of the `x' entirely, and go for `gui'
>> as the generic prefix, and just `ns' and `w32' as the backend prefixes.
>
> The xw-* thing has a precedent, though.  We use gui- for selections
> and such likes, but xw- for the other kind.

It doesn't look as if there's much of a precedent though, since there
are only 4 xw- procedures, all related to colors.

Plus, it looks like most of the gui- prefixed procedures were (recently
-- 25.1) renamed from x- procedures, so using gui- for current x-
procedures would be consistent.

In any case, IMO xw- wouldn't be much better than the current situation;
I would assume it to stand for X Windows (does it not?).

>> Where would be the best place to add the obsolete aliases?
>
> lisp/term/common-win.el, perhaps?

Oh, I figured I couldn't use that because of the `pc' window system, but
it looks like that one doesn't set HAVE_WINDOW_SYSTEM, confusingly
enough.