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: Redisplay problems? Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:41:24 +0200 Message-ID: <838us46lsr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87ppljg4ti.fsf@kanru-mozilla.corp.tpe1.mozilla.com> <5329C53B.3030008@gmx.at> <532ABA60.7000003@gmx.at> <532B3FFE.5020403@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=shift_jis Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1395387679 15204 80.91.229.3 (21 Mar 2014 07:41:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 07:41:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, christian@defun.dk, kanru@kanru.info, cloos@jhcloos.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 21 08:41:27 2014 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 1WQu4z-0004zS-93 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 08:41:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51099 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQu4y-0004ft-PC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 03:41:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44158) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQu4r-0004WQ-AV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 03:41:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQu4n-0004lc-3L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 03:41:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:50338) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQu4m-0004lV-R5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 03:41:13 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N2R00000ZERTZ00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:41:11 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N2S0000700KRU40@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:41:08 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.175 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:170684 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:00:49 -0400 > Cc: Christian Lynbech , James Cloos , > =09Kan-Ru Chen (=92=C2=8A=A4=94@) , > =09emacs-devel@gnu.org >=20 > > But it's a redraw when we expose a hitherto invisible/obscured fr= ame > > whose contents have changed while it was invisible/obscured. >=20 > Yes, of course, but you can look at it as "deiconify with the old > display content" (without recomputing matrices nor redrawing) follo= wed > by a normal redisplay (which may recompute matrices and/or redraw > depending on whether something actually did change while the frame = was > invisible). That would cause an unpleasant momentary display of wrong contents. Anyway, I very much doubt that an iconified frame might have its current matrices outdated. What is the use case for this to happen? > >> Part of the reason it's still fuzzy is that xdisp.c seems to rec= ompute > >> the matrices when it finds a "garbaged" frame, > > But we do have to compute the new matrices to know whether they h= ave > > changed. I'm fully confused now. >=20 > No, if the "redisplay" bits are "false" we know that nothing has ch= anged. Are these bits reset for windows on iconified frames? If so, you hav= e no other way but marking such frames "garbaged" when they are deiconi= fied.