From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Addition to emacsbug.el Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:53:01 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <417F6C5E.5070801@swipnet.se> <417FF8DD.1000408@swipnet.se> <9B209D7F-28A9-11D9-AAAE-000D93505B76@swipnet.se> <24DBCE88-298E-11D9-8B5E-000D93505B76@swipnet.se> <88DBBF2F-2A84-11D9-AA4E-000D93505B76@swipnet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1099155214 4853 80.91.229.6 (30 Oct 2004 16:53:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 16:53:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 30 18:53:19 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CNwTf-0004bL-00 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:53:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CNwbZ-0002lK-F0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 13:01:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CNwbS-0002lC-GU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 13:01:22 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CNwbR-0002km-Jj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 13:01:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CNwbR-0002kj-IQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 13:01:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [206.47.199.166] (helo=simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CNwTO-0003An-Pb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:53:05 -0400 Original-Received: from empanada.home ([67.71.25.5]) by simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20041030165302.OSWA1692.simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@empanada.home>; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:53:02 -0400 Original-Received: by empanada.home (Postfix, from userid 502) id CE8D434BD99; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:53:01 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: "Jan D." In-Reply-To: <88DBBF2F-2A84-11D9-AA4E-000D93505B76@swipnet.se> (Jan D.'s message of "Sat, 30 Oct 2004 17:01:10 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (darwin) 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: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:29179 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:29179 >>> I used Xaw3d. The point that bothered me is if I have two pages in >>> a buffer, scrolling three lines involves a small mouse movement. >>> If I have three lines in the buffer, scrolling three lines involves >>> a very big mouse movement, even if I start with the mouse pointer in the >>> same place in both cases. >> >> If that's the only thing that bothered you with my Xaw3d code, I'm >> flattered ;-). After all, it's the desired behavior (and AFAICT this part >> of the behavior is common to all scrollbar implementations, even for other >> programs). > Well, it is not all. I don't like that the thumb shrinks for "normal" > scrolling, i.e. not overscrolling. As far as I know, no other program has > overscrolling, so the common behaviour is undefined. I do not agree that it > is the desired behaviour. If the window size and the buffer size are the > same, and if the mouse pointer starts the scroll in the same position, then > the same amount of movement should give the same amount of lines scrolled > regardless if this is a normalscroll or an overscroll. But as I said, there > are no programs I know of that has overscrolling, so this is just > an opinion. Hmm... there's obviously something I do not understand here. Your example had two buffers with *different sizes* (one with 2 pages, the other with 3 lines). I myself have never noticed a difference between "overscroll" and "normallscroll" behavior in Emacs, and indeed the code makes no such distinction so the behavior should be exactly the same. Stefan