bug#26379: patch for display.texi

bug#26379: patch for display.texi

[Tak Kunihiro]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 354 bytes --]

My entry point is Info and sometime I think Info needs to be updated.
For example, I could not notice existence of line-pixel-height for a long time.
So having it in Info is very useful.  Thus I want to send a patch for display.texi
to infer line-pixel-height.

However, at the same time, I wonder if sending this kind of patch is really useful.


[-- Attachment #2: display.texi.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 651 bytes --]

--- /cygdrive/c/devel/emacs-25.1/doc/lispref/display.texi	2016-07-25 16:08:38.000000000 +0900
+++ /cygdrive/c/Users/dream/Downloads/display.texi	2017-04-06 08:27:57.979688400 +0900
@@ -2067,7 +2067,15 @@
 numeric height value specifies the line spacing, rather than the line
 height.
 
-  On text terminals, the line spacing cannot be altered.
+  On text terminals, the line spacing cannot be altered.  On graphical
+terminals, for example, the line height you specify can be confirmed by
+following function.
+
+@defun line-pixel-height
+This function returns the height of the line at point in pixels.
+@end defun
+
+
 
 @node Faces
 @section Faces

bug#26379: patch for display.texi

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Tak Kunihiro <tkk@misasa.okayama-u.ac.jp>
> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 08:37:05 +0900
> Cc: Kunihiro Tak <tkk@misasa.okayama-u.ac.jp>
> 
> My entry point is Info and sometime I think Info needs to be updated.
> For example, I could not notice existence of line-pixel-height for a long time.
> So having it in Info is very useful.  Thus I want to send a patch for display.texi
> to infer line-pixel-height.

Thanks, I used a slightly different wording and added it in a
different node.  Pushed to the emacs-25 branch.

> However, at the same time, I wonder if sending this kind of patch is really useful.

Why not?

bug#26379: patch for display.texi

[Tak Kunihiro]

>> However, at the same time, I wonder if sending this kind of patch
>> is really useful.
> 
> Why not?

Writing documentation is not that appreciated in my daily
circumstance.  Thus I was not sure the revision of a few lines is
regarded as `useful'.  Now I know!