From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The future of Follow Mode - a proposal. Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 22:21:33 +0200 Message-ID: <834mcxhnaq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20160218195630.GA2697@acm.fritz.box> <837fi1u5qt.fsf@gnu.org> <20160219142522.GA3193@acm.fritz.box> <83povsr8cc.fsf@gnu.org> <20160219181834.GC3193@acm.fritz.box> <83io1kr12k.fsf@gnu.org> <20160220124415.GA1758@acm.fritz.box> <83wppzo7lf.fsf@gnu.org> <20160223231156.GA26899@acm.fritz.box> <83a8mqhvym.fsf@gnu.org> <837fhthq5z.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1456345310 31985 80.91.229.3 (24 Feb 2016 20:21:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 20:21:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 24 21:21:45 2016 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 1aYfwP-0005xq-Bb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 21:21:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38152 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYfwO-0004h7-FY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:21:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36475) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYfwK-0004gx-Cu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:21:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYfwH-00016o-2B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:21:40 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:50528) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYfwG-00016j-UW; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:21:36 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3964 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aYfwG-0001oS-6i; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:21:36 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:10:28 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:200641 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:10:28 -0500 > > > window boundaries, and make decisions based on that. These decisions > > end up incorrect when the text beyond the window is displayed in a > > window of a different width. > > Hmm... can you give an example? The most striking one is vertical-motion (which doesn't belong to redisplay at all, and thus will not benefit from your suggestion). Redisplay proper does similar stuff at places as part of its decision where to place point and whether/by how much to scroll the window in order to bring point back into view.