From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Infrastructural complexity. Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:08:14 +0200 Message-ID: <4A72B47E.9060608@gmx.at> References: <20090712180623.GA1009@muc.de> <1248280114.7109.33.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A67593D.6020908@gmx.at> <1248289454.7109.47.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A682C53.2080307@gmx.at> <1248375083.15583.9.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A6970B8.7000006@gmx.at> <4A6AC7EA.2010007@gmx.at> <4A6B3CE2.8070404@gmx.at> <4A6C72BE.5080207@gmx.at> <1248628716.5952.11.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A6C961E.3030805@gmx.at> <1248633292.5952.21.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A6D4BE3.9080102@gmx.at> <1248710762.6165.28.camel@dell-desktop.example.com > <4A6DDB8D.2070601@gmx.at> <1248717944.6165.47.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A6EAAE4.3090309@gmx.at> <1248794312.5971.7.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A7010F8.90308@gmx.at> <1248895321.5922.54.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <4A7162CF.6030209@gmx.at> <1248973286.6257.34.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1249031400 5052 80.91.229.12 (31 Jul 2009 09:10:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:10:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, cyd@stupidchicken.com, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, joakim@verona.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@jurta.org, Stefan Monnier , acm@muc.de, drew.adams@oracle.com, Miles Bader To: Thomas Lord Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 31 11:09:51 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 1MWo7X-0002wl-RD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:09:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56785 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MWo7X-0007I1-8K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:09:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MWo6F-0006TM-TK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:08:27 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MWo6B-0006Ph-TA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:08:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40794 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MWo6B-0006PT-Ib for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:08:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:32808) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MWo6A-0001rF-OF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:08:23 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2009 09:08:20 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-63-229.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.63.229]) [62.47.63.229] by mail.gmx.net (mp032) with SMTP; 31 Jul 2009 11:08:20 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18iH/R+M7kiq6lmfrf1GzeMeN/rdOQapp1+JozJeA vJDsgp5fj4ud9/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: <1248973286.6257.34.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.7 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:113449 Archived-At: > Suppose that the edit area contains a > window that is the full width of the edit > area but that there are control panels to > the left and right. > > Would it not DTRT to, for that window, count > the space taken by the control panels as "fringe"? > That is to say that the TOTAL_COLS of the > edit area window would match the total width > of its (whole window system window) frame. There > would be largish "fringe". It would so happen > that the attached frames are drawn in that fringe. Mixing concepts like frames, windows and fringes is beyond my imagination. >> Also an application might want to know whether the coordinates returned >> by `mouse-position' refer to the upper-left corner of the edit area or >> the primary frame. If they refer to the upper-left corner of the >> primary frame, we probably have to, for each primary frame, specify the >> offset of the root window of that frame (the upper-left corner of the >> edit area) in order to be able to determine in which window of the edit >> area the mouse is (provided the edit area can be split). > > Again, I don't see why "fringe" doesn't already > handle this. I don't see why and how it does. >> Changing the underlying functions is the hard thing. If you eventually >> come up with a sketch of how you want to address issues like the ones I >> sketched above I might be able to tell you more. > > Well, there you go. Sorry, that's too much Infrastructural complexity for my taste so I shall give up here. You'll have to talk this over with someone else. martin