From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Renaming non-X x_* procedures in xdisp.c (and elsewhere) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 21:55:22 +0300 Message-ID: <83a7hci44l.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wokp4okn.fsf@gmail.com> <83ef6xpo6b.fsf@gnu.org> <0f4be9a6-6e09-f55d-9f58-2a15aef264cd@cs.ucla.edu> <837ecpplw8.fsf@gnu.org> <871s2w510a.fsf@gmail.com> <922F9B91-2E9E-45F6-BB96-66CAE5E9FB81@gnu.org> <87k1goqpnn.fsf@gmail.com> <83imw8nspc.fsf@gnu.org> <87ftrcqg5j.fsf@gmail.com> <83bm20nm62.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0men4jx.fsf@gmail.com> <83o95sisk7.fsf@gnu.org> <87mulcnui4.fsf@gmail.com> <83bm1si7lf.fsf@gnu.org> <87ef6ont03.fsf@gmail.com> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="52560"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alex Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 30 19:56:03 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hAJ98-000DYo-Pk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 19:56:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41794 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAJ97-00028k-Ll for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 14:56:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49431) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAJ8T-00028O-Fh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 14:55:22 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45245) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAJ8S-0008MP-VS; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 14:55:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3862 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hAJ8Q-0006Nd-EM; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 14:55:20 -0400 In-reply-to: <87ef6ont03.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Alex on Sat, 30 Mar 2019 11:59:08 -0600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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:234825 Archived-At: > From: Alex > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 11:59:08 -0600 > > >> Probably not. I was thinking about the rest being terminal hooks, > >> though. WDYT? > > > > Not sure what you mean by "terminal hooks". They all accept a pointer > > to a frame, no? > > I meant being used through a function pointer in the terminal struct > rather than in the redisplay_interface struct. Are you talking about the arguments these functions receive now? If so, which ones specifically get terminal struct pointers? > >> That would still leave the issue of it making the code > >> single-backend-only. Though, I guess it's not going anywhere. > > > > What do you mean by single-backend-only? There will be several > > implementations, one each for every backend. It's not a catastrophe, > > and I don't see how to solve it without ugly ifdef's or even more > > complications. Doesn't sound justified, as long as no one is working > > on allowing the same session create frames on different > > window-systems. > > The same session and different window-system case was what I was > thinking about, but I agree that it can be put off until someone takes > up that issue. OK, so we agree on that.