From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: grischka Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GTK frame changes Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:50:21 +0200 Message-ID: <4A4CD73D.2080802@gmx.de> References: <4A4CADCB.8000304@gmx.de> <4A4CC3D7.40109@swipnet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1246550007 11779 80.91.229.12 (2 Jul 2009 15:53:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?B?SmFuIERqw6Rydg==?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 02 17:53:20 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MMOb4-00032a-JP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:53:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50309 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MMOb2-0006Ju-TB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:53:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MMOYb-0005iG-CH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:50:41 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MMOYX-0005hu-2T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:50:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40668 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MMOYW-0005hr-Rh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:50:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:51585) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MMOYV-00029I-Ap for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:50:36 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 02 Jul 2009 15:50:25 -0000 Original-Received: from p57A0813F.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.2]) [87.160.129.63] by mail.gmx.net (mp022) with SMTP; 02 Jul 2009 17:50:25 +0200 X-Authenticated: #18588216 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18p/D8Z1BQpOIz9h7UdW7hE968B/ZAPZwDJIYbF29 vs7mhpzad/jg+F User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) In-Reply-To: <4A4CC3D7.40109@swipnet.se> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.63 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:111913 Archived-At: Jan Djärv wrote: > grischka skrev: >> Jan Djärv wrote in Changelog: >> >>> xg_frame_set_char_size): Do not set pixel width/height here or >>> call change_frame_size. Just call flush_and_sync. >>> (flush_and_sync): Reintroduced. >> >> Nice work and the idea is right IMO, just the problem remains that >> "flush_and_sync()" does not guarantee that the resize request was >> actually handled, i.e. that a ConfigureNotify was received before >> flush_and_sync() returns. In my tests in ~70% of runs this is not >> the case. > > No, it is not certain. But if the X server handles requests from > clients in sequence (which it should), it is certain. What makes you think that flush_and_sync would work if requests are handled sequentially by the X server? --- grischka