From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Question about dubious code for terminal frames
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2024 18:55:53 +0300
Message-ID: <864j6y82ye.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <m2wmju8m0t.fsf@pro2.fritz.box> <86wmju8em4.fsf@gnu.org>
 <m2frqi8b3p.fsf@pro2.fritz.box> <86ed628aa3.fsf@gnu.org>
 <m27cbu87s9.fsf@pro2.fritz.box> <868qwa86nq.fsf@gnu.org>
 <m234mi85so.fsf@pro2.fritz.box> <867cbu842s.fsf@gnu.org>
 <m2y14a6ot8.fsf@pro2.fritz.box>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
	logging-data="21199"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rudalics@gmx.at
To: Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 02 17:56:39 2024
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
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 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1sl9Pz-0005Oh-08
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2024 17:56:39 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces@gnu.org>)
	id 1sl9PJ-0001Rx-Kh; Mon, 02 Sep 2024 11:55:57 -0400
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1sl9PH-0001RW-Tv
 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2024 11:55:56 -0400
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
 id 1sl9PG-0006Ds-Vz; Mon, 02 Sep 2024 11:55:55 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
 s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:
 Date; bh=a1tTro8FSnqDuBfJgsYUBP0Gip4N/IFxo+VZ0Oek//Q=; b=co3b2ptxg1GczLD5Q+jO
 rtCv21TLeOv8rb9RbSfptxrrP9GGeSTmd23CjKYdUYxHN97mGEevrFY5QENjgOUfgfcLsZlkEb5zs
 tM9XcatohpAG9Pj0UwnIABIkSL1BNAZ95XCLJH0xsxUlACKMmzmINU8wNqefpEbOe+y3ME0N1q2rN
 f97JQoeK1/q+5pb72DURHT1kn60fh8+1CA2lA2n3RAy9Mbox3Tymapnzr2cvTGESzAIcnUAShLXYH
 wfWA7Gzfu6PN6H1JW4y9+OEcPPkvmMHKX/YwFXPu4qWVnC36vqWGGv22hzMynWM0S4LH2vSXbPNx6
 fWjA3E4OFR5gyg==;
In-Reply-To: <m2y14a6ot8.fsf@pro2.fritz.box> (message from Gerd
 =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 17:46:43 +0200)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:323297
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/323297>

> From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org,  rudalics@gmx.at
> Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2024 17:46:43 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Martin will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the current code
> > already does what you want: it only changes FrameCols/Rows when the
> > terminal was really resized.
> 
> It obviously does not. I mentioned what happens when making child frames
> in adjust_frame_size in my case. There is no SIGWINCH involved. Which
> makes me suspect that you are not taking adjust_frame_size into
> account?

I wasn't talking about child frames, I was talking about "normal"
frames.