From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Additional xterm-mouse cleanup Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 08:52:05 -0500 Message-ID: References: <4ab742d461a50a1b9a0debba781a18ad@finder.org> <3e616ab0b40a4141c8688e9cdc95cdfc@finder.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="8133"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: "jared--- via \"Emacs development discussions.\"" To: Jared Finder Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 25 14:53:34 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lFH5C-00022N-Nq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 14:53:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53964 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lFH5B-00036F-DA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 08:53:33 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52326) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lFH3s-0002GR-In for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 08:52:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:7400) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lFH3q-0003nv-GZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 08:52:11 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B0681100250; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 08:52:08 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2F3E810022F; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 08:52:07 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1614261127; bh=8mAig2g4eVhwIwag4sW38OeavVsfDfFIK5RglA3+HNQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=ELBvmd7uVnXiXTrFHGnk9ZdLnJPHm4rsquYLcPpDmcfW8XyRwOyPVE8rf2qpj50JX 2mWdZPositVvNEVNAEEmt+egaVWJbujSXrXvEWgaEalluWgM8O1AvF4Jvi56QEVZRA nCiRoKQZfsqHKaJvV/Scr6H1mdCs1H2Ox6NE6fCWI9/H3iVisERyKIzAObM38vK6cE zc5KryjQ8W09CbfILTqnsM0/szVdyHZxvXmGNsfqYMTMX3nM1i2KZdqFNrWKL5xjWf 0SZ4NhkA0KgU/WzpVTDFAm7oMuQ/EuE8VBI0pXhtqAViZhUfN2NHx2Zm1hxKhrPamS 2jgyudgNQpxFQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.41.47]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 046B81203E2; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 08:52:06 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Jared Finder's message of "Wed, 24 Feb 2021 22:08:21 -0800") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:265611 Archived-At: >>> Ah, got it. I agree, it is mostly straightforward. To do this properly >>> required making an assumption that .timestamp=0 for SELECT_WINDOW_EVENT >>> is >>> ok. Looking through the C code, I don't see any location that reads >>> .timestamp for the SELECT_WINDOW_EVENT, so I make it uniformly >>> 0 throughout. Updated patch attached. >> Looks good to me. > > Thank you. If it's okay, I'd like it if the two, now simple, patches could > be merged now before the third one, as this third one will take some time. Fine by me, yes. Stefan