Re: Display-based word wrapping

[Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> I've checked in Kim F. Storm's display-based word-wrapping patch, with
>> some modifications.  The word-wrapping is controlled by the `word-wrap'
>> per-buffer variable.  It is a form of continuation line, so e.g. will
>> not be performed if lines are truncated rather than continued.
>
> Why did you choose a separate variable rather than reusing truncate-lines?

The name `truncate-lines' does not give any hint that it controls word
wrapping too.

Do you care about this?  If so, how about this: make truncate-lines an
obsolete alias for `line-wrap-method', which accepts the values
`edge-wrap', `word-wrap', and `truncate', with t equivalent to
`truncate' and nil equivalent to `edge-wrap'.

>> I have also changed truncate-partial-width-windows to accept integer
>> values specifying a window width below which to truncate lines, and
>> changed the default to 30.
>
> Since the Emacs-22 default was t, I think a safer new default (other
> than t) would be something around 70-80, so it behaves as before for
> 80 column frames.

For anyone using the word-wrap feature, that could be annoying.  With
word wrapping, buffers with long lines can be comfortably read in
50-column windows, but if truncate-partial-width-windows is 70-80,
they'll be truncated rather than wrapped.