From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Zoom: a window management minor mode -- best practices and questions Date: Mon, 07 May 2018 21:19:16 +0300 Message-ID: <83603zqqfv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83muxioten.fsf@gnu.org> <5AEAB616.4040900@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1525717081 10349 195.159.176.226 (7 May 2018 18:18:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 18:18:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrea Cardaci Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 07 20:17:57 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fFkhw-0002ZP-PW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 May 2018 20:17:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47556 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fFkk2-0005WC-3E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 May 2018 14:20:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58545) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fFkjP-0005W6-HQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 May 2018 14:19:28 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fFkjL-0006S8-FK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 May 2018 14:19:27 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:57744) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fFkjL-0006Rt-Ar; Mon, 07 May 2018 14:19:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1074 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fFkjJ-0005in-1G; Mon, 07 May 2018 14:19:22 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Andrea Cardaci on Mon, 7 May 2018 14:32:28 +0200) 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: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:225132 Archived-At: > From: Andrea Cardaci > Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:32:28 +0200 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > There's one problem with `buffer-list-update-hook` though, it gets > called (multiple times) even wen the buffer list is not changed, e.g., > simply by clicking in the buffer. Is this the expected behaviour? I don't remember (perhaps Martin does). But if you show a C-level backtrace from such a call to buffer-list-update-hook, it will be easy to say whether this is expected or not. > Besides this, if there's no way to get rid of false positives in event > handling (i.e., a relayout is triggered but no actual change happened) Do you mean that pre-redisplay-function is called? If not, what exactly do you mean by "relayout is triggered"? > Also, oddly enough, `pre-redisplay-function` is never called on macOS > (Emacs 26.1)... That's strange. The most frequent call to pre-redisplay-function is in prepare_menu_bars; are you saying that function is never called on macOS? If you put a breakpoint inside that function, does it never break?