From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Dani Moncayo Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposal: new mode-line `%'-construct %o meaning "Degree of travel of window through buffer". [Patch] Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 12:45:56 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20170515204416.GA7349@acm.fritz.box> <20170520103428.GB4616@acm.fritz.box> <20170523202456.GA10407@acm.fritz.box> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1495622771 26492 195.159.176.226 (24 May 2017 10:46:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 10:46:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs development discussions To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 24 12:46:05 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dDTno-0006eq-F0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 12:46:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54093 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDTnq-0003Ce-TJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:46:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41433) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDTnk-0003CO-1j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:46:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDTnj-0007q6-C6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:45:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lf0-x22b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::22b]:34971) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDTnj-0007ps-5j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:45:59 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lf0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id a5so51526160lfh.2 for ; Wed, 24 May 2017 03:45:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=X4fIXGxVh1GgtsP2GcqznikarpB94NRjPvPGmRrcwDM=; b=CbDgmHa9kHu/1B5oxLIst8dKiveS8BY9KXmn4sChb1gB2fWaoRULKcy8zYFPkxPbWi aJ2W9TfIH2z4jgRfQmuryqTXYLIwYbX5Aav0l+65NzBQ8NrmoPPjaUxIcVn8tE+u44On cmUZEgD4IKDsyxbvM2g7BDyurIhpkkrCmEGC3kqLodt+eQk4t813R/mPpiTJwB3h1ihc p78izyiCj+x/Hpx9vMxg92Cg8q/z0gmwl2I5bV89UozE4rlMR8GbeUMdo95ucPuxqWCL wZ1lZiCNgFxnZ22TDKOIyojPSxJiUIPBBOODTe2MZ3SN7PI31se+vOdtq4gokzqVNEzy L6IA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=X4fIXGxVh1GgtsP2GcqznikarpB94NRjPvPGmRrcwDM=; b=B4HbC59rmufaxTzculs05rYG99J4g1UMn5tLIlGNXGjjp7Jxrc171VNuDenw8oTXzd iUltK8LP9Bidc9cqT2RB+rv0v6qrtDsuLn+GkTWqZJXJ7fyaSe3BapW6D4RTRdft8a45 j9Ko9foSeMjDWROj/54hegSi21TEgIXaJd4LXM+VrsvgLQV9VCN1bID5BYlcPNBnhm4y 7ASwMXRca4YHe9wNuSR1Jv6TNBskamtzzHlh3dcW43X02sSMgiQOGzY0FW7B0e4lxs1Q bPhjj1dZq6li6UoYuyLsiq0CuLZs2C0qXzIpQPG+PjTQPJY3dxEfAeD6kLGmltOYhz2i FKQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcAqA0Q8sSDGnmedc0tTn0VLgPTvCNLmqvaO1y1wcaEyOGiQE8z5 TpwxKW4htDDi95i1zJfUBlPG9QI8pA== X-Received: by 10.25.196.204 with SMTP id u195mr9451162lff.9.1495622757538; Wed, 24 May 2017 03:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.25.29.6 with HTTP; Wed, 24 May 2017 03:45:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170523202456.GA10407@acm.fritz.box> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c07::22b X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:215159 Archived-At: >> I'm thinking of a further refinement for %q: On large enough buffers, >> %q may produce things like "43-43%". In those cases, where both >> percentages are the same, it'd be better (nicer, IMO) to just show one >> of them (e.g "43%"). > > OK, how about the following? It looks good to me. Thanks! -- Dani Moncayo