From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bidi,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Mixed L2R and R2L paragraphs and horizontal scroll Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:01:32 +0200 Message-ID: <83ockbil1v.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83tyu3iu6b.fsf@gnu.org> <4B645FF4.30205@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1264871397 7161 80.91.229.12 (30 Jan 2010 17:09:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 17:09:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-bidi@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-bidi-bounces+gnu-emacs-bidi=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 30 18:09:50 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gnu-emacs-bidi@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NbGpR-0001xT-8e for gnu-emacs-bidi@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:09:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40502 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NbGpQ-0005vZ-Lp for gnu-emacs-bidi@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:09:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NbGiM-0001P9-9a for emacs-bidi@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:02:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=48931 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NbGiJ-0001Oj-Rv for emacs-bidi@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:02:29 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NbGiI-0002Md-AP for emacs-bidi@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:02:27 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:56738) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NbGiF-0002MD-OI; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:02:26 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KX200500I9I0S00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:01:33 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.180.161]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KX2002F9KMH2WG0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:01:30 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <4B645FF4.30205@gmx.at> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-bidi@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of Emacs support for multi-directional text." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-bidi-bounces+gnu-emacs-bidi=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-bidi-bounces+gnu-emacs-bidi=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bidi:470 gmane.emacs.devel:120708 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 17:36:04 +0100 > From: martin rudalics > CC: emacs-devel@gnu.org, emacs-bidi@gnu.org > > > Note that the display of the second line in the leftmost window did > > not change, and as result, the amounts of horizontal scroll in the 1st > > and the 2nd lines are different. This is unlike in the current > > unidirectional display, where all the lines are always hscrolled by > > the same amount. > > What should `window-hscroll' return in that case? Why should it change from what it returns now? Its doc string says: Return the number of columns by which WINDOW is scrolled from left margin. WINDOW defaults to the selected window. So if the window is scrolled from the left margin, either because point is on a L2R line on a column that's beyond the window's right margin, or because the user scrolled with "C-x <", it will return the amount of scroll as it does today. If the window is scrolled from the right margin, it could return a negative value, I suppose. Or we could have a separate function for that. It really depends on what the users of window-hscroll do with the value. Or are you saying that we should scroll the R2L lines to the right by as much as we scroll the L2R lines to the left? That is, are you saying we should display the last example as +---------+---------+-------------------+ |$ijk |abcdefgh$|abcdefghijk | | KJI$|$HGFEDCBA| KJIHGFEDCBA| | | | | +---------+---------+-------------------+ Is this what you are suggesting?