From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: grischka Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#1348: set-frame-width and set-frame-position seem buggy on at least MSWindows Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:22:20 +0100 Message-ID: <492DBE0C.1030707@gmx.de> Reply-To: grischka , 1348@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com 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: ger.gmane.org 1227735087 18022 80.91.229.12 (26 Nov 2008 21:31:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:31:27 +0000 (UTC) To: 1348@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 26 22:32:28 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L5Rzm-0003Yn-NI for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:32:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41608 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L5Ryc-0007Es-WF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:31:15 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L5Rxk-000686-Ft for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:30:20 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L5Rxj-000663-47 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:30:19 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59378 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L5Rxi-00065i-Q2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:30:18 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:50409) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L5Rxi-0000nq-7z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:30:18 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id mAQLUB2W026799; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:30:11 -0800 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id mAQLU3Nd026234; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:30:03 -0800 X-Loop: don@donarmstrong.com Resent-From: grischka Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs Resent-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:30:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: don@donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 1348 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 1348-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B1348.122773456824952 (code B ref 1348); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:30:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 1348) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 26 Nov 2008 21:22:48 +0000 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with SMTP id mAQLMiZ9024946 for <1348@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:22:46 -0800 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2008 21:22:38 -0000 Original-Received: from 1Cust9.tnt6.ber2.deu.da.uu.net (EHLO [149.225.88.9]) [149.225.88.9] by mail.gmx.net (mp018) with SMTP; 26 Nov 2008 22:22:38 +0100 X-Authenticated: #18588216 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+f5LsZFZuf0PTFLldFPCrdRpk2krKH2PTJ9jkEtg qpN83zwuf/DjE9 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) Original-References: 4922BD1F.2080604@gmx.at X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.8 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Resent-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:30:19 -0500 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:22704 Archived-At: martin rudalics wrote: > Interesting. Does the attached patch give better results? Why waste time with looking for "better results" instead of a correct solution? Which is obviously that these set-frame-xxx functions need to wait for the ConfigureNotify event and to handle it before they return.