From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alex Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Renaming non-X x_* procedures in xdisp.c (and elsewhere) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 11:26:43 -0600 Message-ID: <87mulcnui4.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87wokp4okn.fsf@gmail.com> <83ef6xpo6b.fsf@gnu.org> <0f4be9a6-6e09-f55d-9f58-2a15aef264cd@cs.ucla.edu> <837ecpplw8.fsf@gnu.org> <871s2w510a.fsf@gmail.com> <922F9B91-2E9E-45F6-BB96-66CAE5E9FB81@gnu.org> <87k1goqpnn.fsf@gmail.com> <83imw8nspc.fsf@gnu.org> <87ftrcqg5j.fsf@gmail.com> <83bm20nm62.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0men4jx.fsf@gmail.com> <83o95sisk7.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="209159"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 30 18:26:59 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hAHkx-000sJL-6i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 18:26:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43730 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAHkw-0000lX-7N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:26:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37741) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAHkp-0000lD-NE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:26:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAHkn-00016g-TU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:26:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pg1-x52a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a]:45158) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAHkn-000158-CO; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:26:49 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pg1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id y3so2673004pgk.12; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 10:26:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=ly4F9/0IhLjxnSZW0jWHOvVx1W/oazLKnaoetJn4dF4=; b=IRjjwHPij2AooLxRpQqg4ZO17llO9mo3j30etdGAoZysta6FwSzBlEU3L/rodRk8/J D+OjerWlQuXxzVi2UTEjj91JKYaBYVcG0mRYypajAG24TsY94mZJw7Q1HEsVrKUUsPmO Flz6MnQrKKt0Jaz5MbJtWDJ+xRZYtdCh68dmA74pAVmO2sg/32jaYWaxm421D52W1Xbm HSOMR1896KIYtPAc+2VOfdqoBSQDX5Wg93agOm/i+BMrUuGRXwkuPub8n/nEWA1qLpWn WC/ZCdqKLneb0bmYfjXA/B9lu8IpZgsSkaxYllXZeNCt6XWnr/KN4B9vgHX2LNyZNR7L g9Ew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=ly4F9/0IhLjxnSZW0jWHOvVx1W/oazLKnaoetJn4dF4=; b=gpoKp3e9huwniFTHMb8myt3r1pvPX7erln6xWnLkXfBa24k8wndUjnyL2UH44CnujY d2Pi37coOVGl1m4l+pdeg+YNdEqL5BFfkkMs8b6ilpMidzE+RdPBwJaase0aaUooXEKy 7P+RQO/ws9f10zudZcbDjj0UuhPchPcvmBgeLIGv1BEnqmQrdqhT2QCEOkG5cTx6MIIw NFoDruLOs1hGTXbAou3KHO5fEHuPAYDzPMjsXK9DpcpnGl3ObywiSvZi0sCJaFZdIOGq /x7YOJeL+05zvjyqyR7HIeyW7ALGLnQEdqmid3ylHeIkmqk6F6sBbru5qRmNj95A9B5+ JHfw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWl5oBXThQKuSyPWm5wbcmDikWSd4/VIJRVHIC6t6u16NMNU630 e7DhStFu8qmHjLNtsZaUyW1vukb5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyW1uHzUCB2JhpH7teXHCI9+/+ejIfh9eHOH54/8XqFVMJXoF1+xCo/QgxmVlPzxFOnWJ2Lnw== X-Received: by 2002:a62:76c1:: with SMTP id r184mr19290455pfc.229.1553966807048; Sat, 30 Mar 2019 10:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from lylat ([2604:3d09:e37f:1500:1a72:4878:e793:7302]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i24sm7897018pfo.85.2019.03.30.10.26.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sat, 30 Mar 2019 10:26:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83o95sisk7.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:07:36 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:234822 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Alex >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 13:21:22 -0600 >> >> There are three left in xdisp.c: >> >> ** x_clear_under_internal_border >> ** x_change_tool_bar_height >> ** x_implicitly_set_name >> >> Here are those called in frame.{c, h} >> >> ** x_set_scroll_bar_default_{width, height} >> ** x_set_frame_alpha >> ** x_bitmap_icon >> ** x_new_font >> ** x_set_offset >> ** x_set_window_size >> ** x_focus_frame >> ** x_make_frame_(in)visible >> ** x_iconify_frame >> >> This one is called in image.c: >> ** x_query_color(s) > > So why do you prefer not to add this to redisplay_interface? I just would be a bit confused by the association of some of those procedures with redisplay. I would expect the procedures there to be "closer" to the redisplay code, but I suppose I was imagining that there was more of a difference here. There's also a (perhaps outdated) comment in termhooks.h that says that redisplay_interface is window-based while terminal hooks are frame-based. I think that x_clear_under_internal_border is a good fit for the RIF in any case. > We could, of course, invent a new struct and a new macro, but we'd be > reinventing the FRAME_RIF stuff anyway: the result will most probably > look identical to FRAME_RIF, except for names. Is that worth our > while? Probably not. I was thinking about the rest being terminal hooks, though. WDYT? >> This one is called in keyboard.c: >> ** x_get_keysym_name > > This one should simply be renamed without the x_ prefix, I think. That would still leave the issue of it making the code single-backend-only. Though, I guess it's not going anywhere. Should I take it that you are in agreement with the gui- prefix for the Lisp side?