From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Gtk scrollbar: thumb too short
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:29:24 -0600 (CST)
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <200304020429.h324TOP11647@eel.dms.auburn.edu>
References: <20030325193739.ZGIN3924.fep01-svc.swip.net@gaffa.gaia.swipnet.se>
	<E18yO51-0007OS-00@fencepost.gnu.org> <3E8345E8.4090509@swipnet.se>
	<E18yvfS-00079B-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<1048872463.17161.132.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<E18ziPr-0007Sh-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<1049134327.3326.74.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<E190IDu-0000K4-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<buosmt1fztx.fsf@mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp>
	<buo65pxft8a.fsf@mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp>
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1049257764 28482 80.91.224.249 (2 Apr 2003 04:29:24 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 04:29:24 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 02 06:29:21 2003
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 190ZsH-0007P7-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Wed, 02 Apr 2003 06:29:21 +0200
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 190ZtB-0002BY-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Wed, 02 Apr 2003 06:30:17 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 190ZsE-0002K5-00
	for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:29:18 -0500
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 190Zrm-00027z-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:28:50 -0500
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 190ZrS-0000yS-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:28:31 -0500
Original-Received: from manatee.dms.auburn.edu ([131.204.53.104])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 190ZrN-0000fv-00; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:28:25 -0500
Original-Received: from eel.dms.auburn.edu (eel.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.108])
	h324SNoc017428;	Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:28:24 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost)
	by eel.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) id h324TOP11647;
	Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:29:24 -0600 (CST)
X-Authentication-Warning: eel.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to
	teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f
Original-To: miles@gnu.org
In-reply-to: <buo65pxft8a.fsf@mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp> (message from Miles
	Bader on 02 Apr 2003 12:55:49 +0900)
Original-cc: rms@gnu.org
Original-cc: jan.h.d@swipnet.se
Original-cc: otaylor@redhat.com
Original-cc: kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:12832
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:12832

Miles Bader wrote:

   I think that if this is the worry, it's groundless, because the emacs
   extensions are just that -- extensions, which extrapolate existing
   behavior, not really arbitrary differences in details, which is the
   usual case of problems arising with lookalike implemenations.

It is a little bit more complicated than that.  The Emacs behavior
would be an alternative behavior, not an extension.  There are two
unrelated issues:

1. overscrolling versus non-overscrolling.  As Owen pointed out to me,
   GTK already supports both.  That is not the issue we are
   discussing.

2. A character based approach versus a pixel based approach.

Two applications, Emacs and PixelStuff start out with exactly one
window height (say sixty lines) full of stuff.  Both allow
overscrolling to put the last line at the top.  In Emacs, the thumb
covers the entire length of the scrollbar, because all text is
visible, in PixelStuff it covers approximately half (60/119) of the
scrollbar.  We scroll to the bottom.  In PixelStuff, the thumb stays
the same size and moves smoothly to the bottom, until it hits the
bottom, exactly when the last line of real text gets at the top.  In
Emacs, the thumb shrinks gradually to a size determined by (amount of
characters on the last line) / (total amount of characters).  This is
different behavior, not an extension of behavior.

A user of PixelStuff using Emacs for the first time will conclude that
Emacs does not allow overscrolling, because the thumb already is at
the bottom, so no downward scrolling is possible.  An Emacs user using
PixelStuff for the first time will conclude that he is only looking
at half of the real text.

Sincerely,

Luc.