From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [dalias@aerifal.cx: ansi-term \e[J causes spurious newline [revised report]] Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:01:57 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87zm66o80a.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1174539954 21218 80.91.229.12 (22 Mar 2007 05:05:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 05:05:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dann@ics.uci.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 22 06:05:46 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HUFUP-0006Nk-VQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 06:05:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HUFW9-0002Bj-VO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:07:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HUFUj-00082G-SA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:05:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HUFUj-000817-76 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:05:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HUFUi-00080c-Pv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:05:48 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HUFSx-0004yT-Ig for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:03:59 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HUFQz-0006f8-Um; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:01:57 -0400 In-reply-to: <87zm66o80a.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (message from Chong Yidong on Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:51:01 -0400) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:68272 Archived-At: Looking through the code, I think the calls to term-unwrap-line should be removed. The note in the docstring of term-erase-in-display that it "should only be called when point is at the start of a screen line" is also false; this condition generally doesn't hold in situations where this function is called, and if we remove the term-unwrap-line calls, it's not necessary at all. Cursory testing seems to indicate that ansi-term behaves fine without the term-unwrap-line calls. What do you think? I do not know that code, but if we do eventually make the change you recommend, please put in a comment explaining that term-unwrap-line was formerly called there, and a pointer to the test case for which that call was removed. That way, if this change breaks another case, we will see what to do.