From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: recenter-top-bottom Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:17:14 +0000 Message-ID: <876408lypx.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1194848262 10062 80.91.229.12 (12 Nov 2007 06:17:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 06:17:42 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 12 07:17:47 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IrSc5-0006A4-Nh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:17:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IrSbt-0002pN-Bf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:17:25 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IrSbn-0002nC-W4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:17:20 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IrSbl-0002kh-KV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:17:18 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IrSbl-0002kP-FX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:17:17 -0500 Original-Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.172]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IrSbl-0008C0-1n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:17:17 -0500 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so733309ugf for ; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 22:17:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; bh=irPd3p2NvSPvmP9hWdxWBZQ8s6edI78OpgxZ+YI79ag=; b=reVkCCmFgPU0R4Vr7Ldq5Ugk51aaTbi/EwvrphsY0t+7tDNiHKEIwmzsX28rUB+kxDYUeZvQcsD7gKG+I/QiH3B9XL9Beb4dyY8rckZnTEU3wEATMDV4kFz4grh/xU2q1lCGPDWqj8qWV2nGrqyazrSv6W9qS7tYIBCo80u/IqM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; b=HDhXsHkOL/sZRzFjCW48iRXGzc0r7/lCSAV6mlHMOtnrQUw5kw+He9KHCY0SeMaaOnKFGb4Nyvi04+VaTTsGZ+mY+TTxKtNTS973TyI2aPIVLAhVbjvjmhFt0TA2NZl3aJJY4nSBiTieDXoLTiHD7oNf2neeP2qKjafGpJNtR6A= Original-Received: by 10.66.255.7 with SMTP id c7mr469239ugi.1194848236000; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 22:17:16 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from bzg.ath.cx ( [81.99.213.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p39sm4079464ugd.2007.11.11.22.17.11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 22:17:12 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by bzg.ath.cx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CED991575BA; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:17:14 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:59:45 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/23.0.0 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:83025 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > 1. The current window line determines the destination: If within the top > third, move to window bottom. If within the middle third, move to top. If > within the bottom third, move to center. > > That is clever, but it has the bad effect of altering the behavior > of a single C-l. The virtue of your previous idea is that it > only alters the effect of repeated C-l. Fully agreed. See my comment on the fact that any single call to recenter-top-bottom should recenter, whether the display will be modified (recenter) or not ("refresh"). > So I think your first suggestion is better So do I. -- Bastien