From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bidi reordering engine upgraded Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:27:24 +0200 Message-ID: <87ppdr3sab.fsf@zigzag.favinet> References: <834mv55quj.fsf@gnu.org> <543E9122.6070605@yandex.ru> <8338ap5o7l.fsf@gnu.org> <543E9A1C.2010904@yandex.ru> <831tq95m6x.fsf@gnu.org> <83zjcx450f.fsf@gnu.org> <83y4sh43zq.fsf@gnu.org> <543F41C9.3000507@yandex.ru> <83oatc4gz3.fsf@gnu.org> <877g005p11.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <83egu848xv.fsf@gnu.org> <8738ao5emi.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <8361fk3yxc.fsf@gnu.org> <87y4sf45hj.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <838ukf2pcq.fsf@gnu.org> <87tx333zjt.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <8338an2jcd.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1413541442 7694 80.91.229.3 (17 Oct 2014 10:24:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:24:02 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 17 12:23:55 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xf4hO-0004Rc-UR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:23:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59082 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xf4hO-0006bn-Bf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:23:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49409) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xf4h5-0006bQ-Uw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:23:41 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xf4h0-0002ZQ-1O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:23:35 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp207.alice.it ([82.57.200.103]:4756) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xf4gz-0002ZK-N5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:23:29 -0400 Original-Received: from zigzag.favinet (95.245.73.22) by smtp207.alice.it (8.6.060.28) id 5440E61D0001C2F3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:23:29 +0200 Original-Received: from ttn by zigzag.favinet with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xf4kv-0002bn-N2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:27:33 +0200 Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <8338an2jcd.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:25:54 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 82.57.200.103 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:175512 Archived-At: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable () Eli Zaretskii () Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:25:54 +0300 But there are W+1 pixels in a line that starts at X and ends at X+W. W+1, not W. Exactly! We have achieved identical conclusions from reproducible observations! Cool. > | 1 2 3 > | 012345678901234567890123456789 > | *********** > | ^ out out damned dot! Count the stars, and you will see there are 11 of them, not 10. Right -- that's what "11 *s" my message was meant to convey. (No argument here from this pedant. :-D) Where did the 11th one come from, when we requested a width of 10? It comes from the (deeply-reviled, IMNSHO) misdesign of XDrawRectangle(3), which uses the word "width" in the parameter name (and description), but is actually described later to draw a rectangle whose width, as measured by pixels rendered, is =E2=80=98width + 1=E2=80=99. Yuck! And that description is n= ot straightforward, but instead exposes, and thus requires the reader to understand, the =E2=80=98PolyLine=E2=80=99 X protocol request, an implementation detail. Ugh!Ly! [Insert more ranting here.] Well, i'm starting to foam at the mouth re Xlib, which was one of the motivations for scheming on the socket directly (inducing other foamings, of course...), so i'll stop now. Why not just a single-pixel vertical line instead? Wouldn't that lose the "hollow" look? Also, depending on choice of foreground (text) and cursor colors, that could obscure the glyph completely. =2D-=20 Thien-Thi Nguyen GPG key: 4C807502 (if you're human and you know it) read my lisp: (responsep (questions 'technical) (not (via 'mailing-list))) =3D> nil --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlRA7w8ACgkQZwMiJEyAdQI4uQCfSTb9z4L5MfZ4iJYomiLMz5fw hmgAnilREtvuT/qiPFC2dEdkcapqqx+8 =pHxv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--