From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Display scaling? Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 08:29:03 +0200 Message-ID: <83ilu5g09c.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877danm1ds.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <877danm1ds.fsf@yahoo.com> <83o83yhcxt.fsf@gnu.org> <8735lamyad.fsf@yahoo.com> <838rv2hba4.fsf@gnu.org> <87y232liu4.fsf@yahoo.com> <834k5qh7pu.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtjiknbc.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32701"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 27 07:31:52 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nCyK0-0008K6-LD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 07:31:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49106 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nCyJz-0001cb-3T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 01:31:51 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38202) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nCyHX-0007yu-Vi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 01:29:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=49960 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nCyHQ-0004ty-CP; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 01:29:18 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=J+1wr9nvmuV1+7v5Rz7IznV6ciIz0RhRQE+ZqTLEaNw=; b=FIzE7K5K7p4D XLPxXy70ZG9wkDzi4WzankWfnwDkzT9+vCSM8fGjRymwFGD21ruYZ9weIymOK69lyWE9e4D0MsYow 01Wz4r3edeDlKmFjctL3ygkbtcglULLSRI5QAVEkFH85GMPMm3toLfErl0SPfWje5PBEMMwILYsd7 pmNI3kk62ACHPLwi4P3aqcgTOKCJWtgBtvNZacvHxEnn76NNkHC+VEso3LhCrvmKpFqK6V9EK6+hD bM3TJaFpQU+lj2S9ZQlVr0rRlCu7o7h07c2rBmhjCe/eO4iUpsb0Eo8p8PaUldweWx/fWPZFSMQ0a pNSrbAbZVjLpYVwM1lIg8A==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=4085 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nCyHM-0007AF-SR; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 01:29:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87mtjiknbc.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Thu, 27 Jan 2022 08:57:27 +0800) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:285474 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 08:57:27 +0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > From past discussions, the initial solution you propose will be > > considered as bug by users. > > Could you point me to some of those discussions? Sorry, I don't have the references handy. You'll need to search the archives for HiDpi+fringe+bitmap, perhaps. > AFAIU, the scaling on the NS and PGTK ports is generally considered > superior to the other ports, and they simply scale the bitmaps up. You mean, if you scale up enough, you actually see the pixels as small squares? > > In the past we discussed only 2 resolutions, in which case providing > > another set of fringe bitmaps sounds plausible. But you seem to be > > talking about supporting any arbitrary scale, not just the double one > > of HiDpi displays, and that calls for a different implementation that > > we should IMO think over up front. > > Some of those monitors already default to a 400% scale, so GNOME and NS > already aren't constrained to double scales. My point wasn't about the scale value itself, it was about the number of scale values we want to support. If it is a small number of discrete values, we could prepare bitmaps for each of the supported values, but if the number is practically infinite, we cannot use such a solution. > How about using a vector graphics format for the "new" fringe bitmaps? > We already have SVG support, but IMHO SVG is too heavy and isn't present > on every system, so maybe a custom vector graphics format for fringe > bitmaps would be in order. That's exactly the issue that may need to be resolved, yes. If indeed we want to support a large number of scales.