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: make-pointer-invisible on Windows Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 08:36:06 +0200 Message-ID: <558BA156.6090508@gmx.at> References: <558A75C6.7040003@gmx.at> <83zj3pdusu.fsf@gnu.org> <558AEB8D.4070603@gmx.at> <83k2usewtv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435214191 743 80.91.229.3 (25 Jun 2015 06:36:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 06:36:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 25 08:36:23 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z80lq-0001Uu-GW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Jun 2015 08:36:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54137 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z80lp-0004x1-QH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Jun 2015 02:36:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59481) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z80lm-0004ww-9m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Jun 2015 02:36:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z80ll-0008AA-G9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Jun 2015 02:36:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:52816) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z80lg-00087t-Ld; Thu, 25 Jun 2015 02:36:12 -0400 Original-Received: from [91.113.6.71] ([91.113.6.71]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LanoO-1YfFb92SHg-00kNaz; Thu, 25 Jun 2015 08:36:11 +0200 In-Reply-To: <83k2usewtv.fsf@gnu.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ItlDcmnx//rVF9p7fK6HB+pRC/ANHKxVHa+xd0LtsEzreyeWuLJ U4mpdr3XdR3+lLu2LsyAkC/3zzAKzHlUHVknFPxE6u/SOemMScP6iY3JRxNFLOKAsR796ws cQeTPV0vnhtZTVJMaFR51WDad3+gnlok0/ENTZud6sapU/0jr0ysR2dDZqvuhmIlTP2asXX puNAuAyf//l+bo0XgqiWw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:Cf4355rI9i8=:COnOQ/wBdX9+1eV8Q6sYw+ PWsRtHb8evOPu6yTagzatkZPPVopy+NxvvG9TxSAsSeeD0iav83oeySOtO50oENKOaHRAsYvl AN84ep5kSihRmGSDUOPnDfkmNJr4KL5RtfQCOmz0j9Y+ZF3V6usd1sMPCEodGDjTuP+b2vnBe mpBOChCKC3K2HwRY9OtKiAIj74okmF9JuoNuc7PUIn5WaI6/U87+cbuF4yP9gn22L4EQg6mtq tfD40UdFBHPgnl8osElwFNmaoXiiYG9X0uzf3UrrRV06kEQ821pIJn2jfXLN/WDUkHIHXPcpx +GeOjynZXOhjv/z4oM7wur7TNMO/XlhHr5sauWcAvnqf69WRfZ9/Qeu0zOWmAF/x17h7O73bt uR94B3p0FpQaD0ExWa43mvmI2clGEbvttE1lk0XA/wDW5pgOgA5D1Ecww2ebP4U+Ue9If9QzL JCa2AfcaJ54ugGAbNh5SImgmeluooVMo4UTegFjfQGLTwOAnUw+zHG4uKiEZvkeD1Iv/fnz0l 2S16N4/6Iga38jdUgbrDCUs1bArtFVU1etNurJw2nZJxkUePE7FTtHB9mpDfSLoypsMokIPj8 mqfvfMA+sDfn74JlOALx9a5f2jIbuBqj005I3pDOXUtsQgfzI17iN9/5xFvcfDizZTgkukeib emVqv6G3VuH6ksZxmF6FjJWzAW2L79gxy01UilX+rKhuIaZxGZHcy7b5hEiDWU3YqdvY= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.19 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:187509 Archived-At: >> Hopefully only for the first self-inserting character typed. After that >> the f->pointer_invisible != invisible fails until the mouse is moved. > > In theory, yes. I'm using this for a couple of months and never had a problem in practice either. > But doing this makes me nervous, since inserting a > single character is something the display engine knows how to optimize > very well. This disables all those optimizations. Note that the mouse cursor can appear _anywhere_ on your frame when you type the first character. So in order to get rid of it you do have to redraw the entire frame IMO. > There are less radical ways of triggering more thorough redisplay, > than redrawing the whole frame. I will look into this when I have > time, if no one beats me to it. Please do that. >> > Also, what about the equivalent of the X code that makes the pointer >> > visible on focus-in events -- don't we need that on MS-Windows? >> >> I don't know. It's certainly not necessary on XP here. People would >> have to try though. In general, it seems that X and Windows differ >> quite substantially in their respective behaviors. For example, on X, >> when a synchronous shell operation is active, the cursor becomes visible >> as soon as the mouse is moved. On Windows, the cursor remains invisible >> until the shell operation terminates and the frame gets redrawn >> (obviously, the frame doesn't look very decent in that period either, so >> there are worse problems). > > I don't think this is related to the issue at hand. I don't think so either. My point was that X and Windows run into different problems when trying to make the pointer invisible. martin