From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: frame size&position woes Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:42:49 +0200 Message-ID: References: <51EBEA23.2000805@gmx.at> <51ECEBDB.8010203@gmx.at> <837ggiy4ko.fsf@gnu.org> <83y58yvvse.fsf@gnu.org> <83ppu8wr1d.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1374662618 8891 80.91.229.3 (24 Jul 2013 10:43:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:43:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: martin rudalics , Emacs developers To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 24 12:43:40 2013 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 1V1wXj-0008BH-RJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:43:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59652 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1wXj-0000VB-Gs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:43:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48168) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1wXe-0000U8-Ao for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:43:36 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1wXc-00007R-P4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:43:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ee0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c00::22f]:36073) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1wXb-00006k-C0; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:43:31 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ee0-f47.google.com with SMTP id e49so144678eek.20 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 03:43:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=RzNMY7Ahb+MqEFb0WuzlU8nVOGkuNB+UBLIP4EIAgm8=; b=tF3BLu0qsTkrdbCVhbGqnd+klxXNSBPVVMulepIHY0z4MApTzH4zC2cWeKW4pQ3xpK m2NSJsUqz+UcahHfHUKuJ0aOsaDB7vyQbd8WXHpsF+fK2tEPkTAzKZInmkecrGFnC8KA 2T3Xda4wbjAixL7q1JJzLtqKgCexRCiRVHVxkum0qxK/M9avEwLgYRRNicuAcj9B7apl INnLLOXrzkNroMZvzPnwqAPXAjeQfJV0Cj5YBwWfYb8UnSsPCJkRbN1VRauHXrzqB69c RpYXcb+h8a/umf7NdYUNHHqAYFCYaSQHQDd2ChG3ca++GPoDqfuHP6sJspDfaa3NFYKj 7Oww== X-Received: by 10.14.48.5 with SMTP id u5mr1526433eeb.89.1374662610100; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 03:43:30 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.14.142.4 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 03:42:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83ppu8wr1d.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4013:c00::22f 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:162105 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > You should be able to approximate that by multiplying the > character-unit dimensions by the pixel size of the default face's > font. Yes. That's what I called "crude heuristics". > The result might be a few pixels off, but I don't see that as a > grave problem, at least not until we have better facilities. Let's assume there's a new option `desktop-restore-frames-move-onscreen'. If the user sets it to t, and I move back a frame that was really visible, but just by a few pixels, that's a tiny failure. But if I don't move back a frame that is a few pixels off, and so, harder to access for the user without UI tricks or M-: (modify-frame-parameters ...), that's a worse problem (not earth shattering, but definitely not very user-friendly). Which means that, to be safe, the heuristics must include a small constant factor to err on the safe side. Crude. So yes, I'll do it, but certainly not having a get-frame-window-system-metrics pains me. > It's good enough for me, because currently I have to restore my frames > manually every time I quit and restart Emacs for some reason. Uh? Have you filed a bug report about it? J