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.bugs Subject: bug#72771: 31.0.50; shr html renderer throwing "Specified window is not displaying the current buffer" Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 09:22:55 +0300 Message-ID: <86v7zpktog.fsf@gnu.org> References: <875xrrr6x3.fsf@hw.ac.uk> <861q2fqt6r.fsf@gnu.org> <875xrrcgia.fsf@gmail.com> <3482d616-8a1c-d458-8da4-1b9d12ff32c5@gmail.com> <867cc6pi5b.fsf@gnu.org> <86ed6dn3ta.fsf@gnu.org> <5ae9ebbe-924a-5f8a-6630-12f009c96629@gmail.com> <868qwlmbte.fsf@gnu.org> <990d87c2-5891-569e-d84c-4d1c473aafbe@gmail.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35380"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: R.Stewart@hw.ac.uk, 72771@debbugs.gnu.org, kevin.legouguec@gmail.com To: Jim Porter Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 25 08:23:39 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1si6f4-000953-T3 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 08:23:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1si6ej-0006At-Sm; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 02:23:17 -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 ) id 1si6eh-0006Ag-66 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 02:23:15 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1si6ef-0008B7-Ho for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 02:23:14 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:To:Subject; bh=WvJ3zLHMjVjrjq1pPDEgnV45Ibv3SQ+noS0fsM9pOYQ=; b=WRYPs5ng1Jecc8Bu1utvSe1AeVpdPNlaj/HnYQjRscVmVIMAKA8zJHxZqiWQ9q6hM9V7e8Qil354EG73wjXlif+Cc7D966eVtAPUIRqb+350Wl/U+m+tOPRX6hJGema1szBMxvxal2rsDVUSLTRH0RKI/nDAQJ/FzzYW0NI/YFpSylYH/JJt2hWIAMpJBpoXytEUGQCdKmOblVhJCIJ43c+/kg37qk8q7bootNP4W4y6cnufJGMdlxxnjJpqoDOxfrndFxot2+FbsIFbAGvb0XIqtUXxyYl+Ps+24dcX4BvAl2C9I1HY34REsPZCcuZthXpTmOE97utVE5rJtE9C0g==; Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1si6fS-0002Wh-0a for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 02:24:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 06:24:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 72771 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 72771-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B72771.17245670379701 (code B ref 72771); Sun, 25 Aug 2024 06:24:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 72771) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Aug 2024 06:23:57 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42164 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1si6fM-0002WM-Ms for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 02:23:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:57076) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1si6fK-0002Vs-Id for 72771@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 02:23:55 -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 ) id 1si6eR-000888-10; Sun, 25 Aug 2024 02:22:59 -0400 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=WvJ3zLHMjVjrjq1pPDEgnV45Ibv3SQ+noS0fsM9pOYQ=; b=RQIifZrb9hyF X0ewIGln16Rynqe3uBcn7otsz4j+lSAtYQkrUdSt80+3ukU86ATbGYzbTKe3oTYVYnCeWDMrRzRSc 6054RFasqAcJ42SdHvWzZ7Xi6tZAY8W294NZleqPzolhMvi89z5nrYklYHWXtQCPsBeBF8pQw/kYE NedYfkjXHNKYQzSl/ytS5HfG42ZDW+JoToZYRyUZuZ3Andt+YwBV8mwmSLGcla3Y36ZXo6dS5WFqS S8tNTGvYY9lgs4FRORTa9a+WeIKsqpYRKdKgorhJBMLyybWweQ/IyWc1c1PM55ksvSxNnXkXpsIvR drZkmT7AL4eZDATS8CI4PQ==; In-Reply-To: <990d87c2-5891-569e-d84c-4d1c473aafbe@gmail.com> (message from Jim Porter on Sat, 24 Aug 2024 23:11:46 -0700) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:290723 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2024 23:11:46 -0700 > Cc: R.Stewart@hw.ac.uk, 72771@debbugs.gnu.org, kevin.legouguec@gmail.com > From: Jim Porter > > Previously, you'd suggested using 'string-pixel-width' using a few > characters to compute an average width. After thinking about it, I > realized that it's actually possible to get the real > 'font->average_width' value using 'string-pixel-width': just use a > display spec! > > (string-pixel-width > (propertize some-length-1-string 'display '(space :width 1))) > > That works out nicely since then the only function I'm using to compute > string widths in this code is 'string-pixel-width', so there's less risk > of different functions having slightly different font handling. Good idea. > >> Thanks for prompting me to re-read the manual on this. I'd > >> misinterpreted this passage in the documentation for 'query-font': > [snip] > > I don't see how this is different from the text we already have, > > sorry. > > Here's another variation on the documentation that might be clearer? > > "The average width of the font characters. Emacs uses this value when > calculating text layout on display. If this is zero, Emacs uses > the value of space-width instead." That's again exactly what the current text does, just broken into sentences differently. I'm sorry, I must understand what is it in the original text that misled you, before I can consider any changes. The updated patch LGTM, thanks.