From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24085: 25.1.50; `make-frame' given `top' param creates frame with ~10x smaller `top' Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 22:00:33 +0300 Message-ID: <8360rqsy7i.fsf@gnu.org> References: <<<0bfd2e8d-9d9b-4737-a637-5175eaaf41c0@default> <57987CBA.2060405@gmx.at>>> <<<3657859c-03f1-4eca-9a78-a9be0dee6552@default>>> <<<83h9bbrqx5.fsf@gnu.org>>> <<06a3fb2a-b975-41cf-8aa3-c2cbe207057f@default>> <<838twnrngr.fsf@gnu.org>> <325b79e8-c40b-46f7-a89a-11f0888b0a68@default> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1469647241 18267 80.91.229.3 (27 Jul 2016 19:20:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:20:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 24085@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 27 21:20:30 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1bSUNa-0008HT-6A for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 21:20:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48289 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bSUNZ-0005kd-30 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:20:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44063) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bSUNC-0005X8-FK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:20:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bSUN8-00026g-7s for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:20:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:51172) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bSUN8-00026b-4W for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:20:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bSUN7-0000KU-Tq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:20:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:20:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 24085 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 24085-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B24085.14696471861240 (code B ref 24085); Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:20:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24085) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2016 19:19:46 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48469 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bSUMs-0000Jw-51 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:19:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52955) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bSUMo-0000Jg-5n for 24085@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:19:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bSU4f-00055H-NY for 24085@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:01:01 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:60892) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bSU4f-00055D-Jz; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:00:57 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3269 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bSU4c-0006p4-PQ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:00:57 -0400 In-reply-to: <325b79e8-c40b-46f7-a89a-11f0888b0a68@default> (message from Drew Adams on Wed, 27 Jul 2016 11:39:49 -0700 (PDT)) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:121603 Archived-At: > Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 11:39:49 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, 24085@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > > > Would someone please revert this, and let `make-frame' respect the > > > > > frame parameters handed to it, in particular `top'? > > > > > > > > Not a chance, sorry. > > > > > > Huh? What's that all about? > > > > Reverting the change will reintroduce the bug it fixed > > Obviously, as I indicated in my earlier message, I meant that the > bug that it fixed should be fixed properly, without treading on > `make-frame'. If on MS Windows you think the first Emacs frame > should be positioned so that it does not overlap the task bar, > then do that. But do it without affecting what `make-frame' does. > > > so doing that is out of the question. > > What _is_ in the question, then? Anything else. > If you are unwilling to fix the code, will you fix the doc? If that's the best we can do, yes. > Just what bug did this change seek to fix? Wasn't it only the default, > initial behavior of Emacs for the initial frame? If so, how is this > general change to `make-frame' the right fix for that bug? Please re-read the discussion, the answers are there. > And how would it hurt for `make-frame' to at least respect an _explicit_ > frame alist argument, which is, after all, optional? Why does it have > such an argument, if it no longer respects it? The code that bothers you is not in make-frame. > But why take over the single, general-purpose frame-creation Lisp > function we have, changing its behavior to ignore parts of optional > arg PARAMETERS (on one platform, no less), just to accommodate the > special case of the initial frame? No one took over any Lisp function. The code in question is deep in the low-level support for creating frames on Windows. What it does is make sure a frame, any frame, is not displayed with its echo area's view obstructed by the task bar. > This makes no sense to me. And I find it hard to believe that you > would not consider fixing that bug properly and restoring `make-frame' > to a general-purpose function that respects whatever optional frame > parameters are specified. You put in my mouth things I didn't say.