From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7802: bug #7802: 24.0.50; Extraneous `mouse-3' event when do `double-mouse-3' Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 11:34:11 +0800 Message-ID: <87oc7qeong.fsf@gnu.org> References: <6AF23E536D254FC88C35DA0BEC775C1A@us.oracle.com> <7EB632A3268149CA89DA1D58C8046A01@us.oracle.com> <9496EDBB00F3470E9417340D3CDBA5E1@us.oracle.com> <87tyhje666.fsf@gnu.org> <0BC7B2E648C8499CAC13F1D3D3A7A72E@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1294545253 24089 80.91.229.12 (9 Jan 2011 03:54:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2011 03:54:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 7802@debbugs.gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 09 04:54:09 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1PbmM4-0001tz-LW for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Jan 2011 04:54:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58834 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PbmM4-0007Ia-4E for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:54:08 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57529 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PbmLz-0007FL-T4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:54:04 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PbmLy-0003J0-MX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:54:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:44098) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PbmLy-0003Iw-Jz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:54:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pblwn-0004Mj-TQ; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:28:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jason Rumney Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 03:28:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7802 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 7802-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7802.129454362416714 (code B ref 7802); Sun, 09 Jan 2011 03:28:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7802) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2011 03:27:04 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pblvr-0004LX-Vy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:27:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com ([209.85.214.172]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pblvp-0004L5-9f for 7802@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:27:01 -0500 Original-Received: by iwn40 with SMTP id 40so18360770iwn.3 for <7802@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 19:34:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:received:from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent :mime-version:content-type; bh=ZXde9U3wj0RFOQeJAn0KcVva5T3ALnxY1lwvQwB+E88=; b=WNPF13l6eWxsfmK6MvQixehp7PqNnu6J/b8+VkLC83ZVs/lQA2+/Q8iaCSHK30419i Lst1GU+x2F9D2M4abTHSi/Lasq0iwtdpoylaFHkyIuL6e7JsMcbzN6nzfGYc0FQIbD+y nYqwuSJMzaEt94Nq7diStwQC7nC7Cc/Hie8HE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=NuIyUk7WvmWcQqhJUCWsQckiW+gNy0ABRf7eqlZAXXb8Lo5D/xhD7acHm2x4d9iEIK LSZBvQAP3X/LJswylRpF28XHEZunvMqrTQdGhzIjDj643Sqt6LWfk75fLqsqd/CXiauO wOMOCToJvBT7Bvj6oyhKVgN8ZVXFovcTFgTrU= Original-Received: by 10.231.169.208 with SMTP id a16mr13256774ibz.45.1294544062179; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 19:34:22 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from home.jasonrumney.net ([180.72.70.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 34sm24690499ibi.8.2011.01.08.19.34.16 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 08 Jan 2011 19:34:18 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by home.jasonrumney.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 74833ED6; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 11:34:12 +0800 (MYT) In-Reply-To: <0BC7B2E648C8499CAC13F1D3D3A7A72E@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Sat, 8 Jan 2011 09:22:14 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 22:28:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:43222 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: >> No. Windows does the same as Emacs, which is why we inherit this >> behaviour. > > Emacs design is based on Windows behavior (shudder)? ;-) No. But the fact that Windows has the same design leads weight to the fact that this is a valid design decision. > Are you saying that a Windows program _cannot_ bind a double-click mouse-2 or > mouse-3? Yes. If they want to handle double clicks of mouse-2 and mouse-3, or triple clicks of any mouse button then they need to handle it themselves the same way that Emacs does. > Or that a Windows program can _only_ have double-click mouse-1 select > the item under the mouse pointer? No. I was saying that normally that is what mouse-1 does in programs that handle double clicks, so the fact that a double click also produces a click event is not normally percieved as a problem. > And even if Windows were by necessity "rather more limited", that > wouldn't be an argument for limiting Emacs (in general) in this > respect. It was not supposed to be. I was using this example merely to show that Emacs is not unique in this design decision. >> > But why not just try to wait and see what the user action really is? >> >> How long do you propose to wait? > > Oh, I dunno - some reasonable defined and documented time period. ;-) > > How about variable `double-click-time' (or some small adjustment thereof, if > that's not entirely appropriate)? Its two descriptions fit this well, AFAICT: > > "Maximum time between mouse clicks to make a double-click. > Measured in milliseconds. The value nil means disable double-click > recognition; t means double-clicks have no time limit and are detected > by position only." [doc string] > > "The variable `double-click-time' specifies how much time can elapse > between clicks and still allow them to be grouped as a multiple click. > Its value is in units of milliseconds. If the value is `nil', double > clicks are not detected at all. If the value is `t', then there is no > time limit. The default is 500." [(emacs) Mouse Buttons] 500ms is already a perceptable delay. And some users with motor control difficulties may set it much longer. If we did this I have no doubt that YOU would be complaining about the response time of mouse click events. > (BTW, shouldn't Emacs on Windows pick up this user setting as the > default value for `double-click-time'?) I don't know if this setting is exposed to programs, as the intention is for Windows to use it internally when generating double click events. If it is exposed, then yes it would be good to use for the initial value of double-click-time.