From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Ryan McGeary" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [ryanmcgeary@hotmail.com: display-pixel behavior changed on Mac OS X] Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:06:14 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1176315213 14167 80.91.229.12 (11 Apr 2007 18:13:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 18:13:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 11 20:13:31 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 1HbhJw-0006Zz-IA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:13:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HbhO0-0005i4-Kq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:17:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hbcal-0001lz-HL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:10:31 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hbcah-0001cf-JQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:10:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hbcah-0001cV-At for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:10:27 -0400 Original-Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.170]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HbcWd-0007WS-JA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:06:15 -0400 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j3so112119ugf for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 06:06:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=LLHnk9Rq3Bh1hNxPUzqR8eS83WZW8eMGK0FYs5+Rg+MuUm3bSbtzLsH9Nsm+A4Ab1JpsgPfnzpQpLed3z8HNeklHOL6V1UQRuSU7Kt5gfvrzSakw/V064YLf5y/IYLqHziI2kwHDpeyyGM1Z4tcqy4ZHPVOXnOhDnDiDc57DIQY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=spEdn9WQkAz1VE3psfcn6xANb/Z7HE3OKOGP5jMEIpbQJQ2J6jW2COxnOE4iMumTMeZD2QgL8p2jY6yX+3FBH5KDRHGUVkY5RSkEurRdWRRltyslZe1LON5kxbjAwSaIROu0MD8ce4qdsvoK5QYSd50+eHlKLCtA2Ufps37x6qA= Original-Received: by 10.67.93.6 with SMTP id v6mr434350ugl.1176296774099; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 06:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.67.92.8 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 06:06:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8f49b8e4dcebe5b7 X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 (Google crawlbot) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:17:37 -0400 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:69297 Archived-At: On 4/11/07, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu wrote: > > That's not a bug, and the change is for consistency with X11. The > related thread starts from > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-pretest-bug/2007-03/msg00412.html Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate the strive for consistency with X11, but I fear the recent change loses useful functionality in other areas. I now understand the terminology difference between display and framebuffer, but seeing as how "emacs doesn't have a concept to distinguish multiple framebuffers yet," what would be the best way to determine the dimensions of the main "framebuffer?" It sounds like this is no longer possible with the latest change. David Reitter makes an good point when he says, "What complicates matters is that multiple monitors may be arranged so that the total desktop area is not rectangular. Just having information about total width and height won't be enough." -Ryan