From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#21333: 25.0.50; window-size-change-functions not called after mini-window resize Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 17:05:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <83k2skhhz1.fsf@gnu.org> <55DB5D3E.1000706@gmx.at> <83vbc4fsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <55DC1856.7000501@gmx.at> <83pp2bfln1.fsf@gnu.org> <55DD662A.8080201@gmx.at> <83si765aqv.fsf@gnu.org> <55DEC2DB.9080800@gmx.at> <83a8tc6988.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c08095ece9ed3051e4df971 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1440695200 13668 80.91.229.3 (27 Aug 2015 17:06:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 17:06:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 21333@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 27 19:06:20 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0cv-00070l-Aa for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 19:06:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43728 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0cu-0007Ib-NS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:06:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40810) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0co-0007DM-L1 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:06:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0ck-0002s4-F4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:06:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:48254) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0ck-0002rn-7b for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:06:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0cj-0002qb-Ub for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:06:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Pip Cet Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 17:06:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 21333 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 21333-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B21333.144069514210913 (code B ref 21333); Thu, 27 Aug 2015 17:06:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 21333) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Aug 2015 17:05:42 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40464 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0cQ-0002px-0S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:05:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yk0-f169.google.com ([209.85.160.169]:36326) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0cK-0002pl-Lc for 21333@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:05:37 -0400 Original-Received: by ykfw73 with SMTP id w73so26782676ykf.3 for <21333@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 10:05:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=3J2m1MOR49b4Cu+wrscdMAsKvLV910YL+0UKh656OSE=; b=LutNvQQ4HAj/CCkoAOwOfSRZqoUKiFM+Jd3ekM/Eo6tNf+xDDZH1oj0+6BKqF5JbVX n35kn0IaVWCLx1aZkBJXsmetPlwsMF6xs2cud4uz49V+7FL7e+X3xgOtAdmndKu0ptaO MKWapkyoCptKnKXORy+qquxY8s5w5TvDY03O2u/L1JMR1hsEy7sAF9xSrkbN0uol7My8 RqMU/NRia1DRstfDNgMU2ZPo5glbna5NetKE6NtA++Z2pQ++awiXq6NbjYac1iF+nn2K 4NK1CtfiLYDU2KhYsBeBzbCFcGR0mTkmQSsGLnZdHVaPBxkyZTiTWm6W5XArojuIkqfI aUUg== X-Received: by 10.13.220.131 with SMTP id f125mr2694640ywe.65.1440695135928; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 10:05:35 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.37.74.200 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 10:05:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83a8tc6988.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:105880 Archived-At: --94eb2c08095ece9ed3051e4df971 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > `follow-mode' has to synchronize the =E2=80=98window-end=E2=80=99 of on= e window with the > > =E2=80=98window-start=E2=80=99 of another. > > Not when one of them is temporarily obscured by a resized mini-window, > IMO. > I think that is indeed a matter of opinion (and should thus be subject to customization), but I don't think we should assume that recursive editing invocations or long message scenarios are always short-lived. > Since mini-window resizing can persistently > > change the end position of the first of these windows > > Any command that clears the echo area will resize it back, AFAIK. So > it's not persistent. > That's not what I'm seeing here. When I run: (progn (run-with-timer 2 nil (lambda () (message "hi"))) (run-with-timer 3 nil (lambda () (message ""))) (read-from-minibuffer (make-string 3000 ?*))) The minibuffer resizes once, when the read-from-minibuffer prompt makes it grow to its maximal size; it then stays at that size as the short message is being displayed, then restores the long minibuffer prompt without changing size again when the echo area is cleared. > > OT1H we do care about point being visible when its window is partially > > obscured by the mini-window and deliberately scroll the window in that > > case. OTOH we'd say that `follow-mode' should not care about keeping > > its text coherent in that case. Is that fair? > > Yes. In that situation, the user most probably reads the mini-window > text anyway, and if not, then she reads the text at point. The > probability that she is reading the text that will be scrolled out of > view as result of the mini-window resize is IMO minuscule. > So if, for whatever reason, I have a timer function that displays a two-line message once a second (so the echo area never goes back to its single-line state), my follow-mode buffer will be and remain in an inconsistent state until I manually resize a window, when it will go back to a consistent state, but then if I cancel the timer (and the mini-window shrinks) it'll be in an inconsistent state again, and the only way out of that one is another manual window resize? I think that last case is something we haven't considered yet: if I resize windows manually while the mini-window is enlarged, they will be in an inconsistent state when it goes back to normal, right? --94eb2c08095ece9ed3051e4df971 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>= wrote:
> `fo= llow-mode' has to synchronize the =E2=80=98window-end=E2=80=99 of one w= indow with the
> =E2=80=98window-start=E2=80=99 of another.

Not when one of them is temporarily obscured by a resized mini-windo= w,
IMO.

I think that is indeed a matter of= opinion (and should thus be subject to customization), but I don't thi= nk we should assume that recursive editing invocations or long message scen= arios are always short-lived.

> Since mini-window resizing can persistently
> change the end position of the first of these windows

Any command that clears the echo area will resize it back, AFAIK.=C2= =A0 So
it's not persistent.

That's not= what I'm seeing here. When I run:

(progn
=C2=A0 (run-with-ti= mer 2 nil (lambda () (message "hi")))
=C2=A0 (run-with-timer 3= nil (lambda () (message "")))
=C2=A0 (read-from-minibuffer (m= ake-string 3000 ?*)))

The minibuffer resizes once, when t= he read-from-minibuffer prompt makes it grow to its maximal size; it then s= tays at that size as the short message is being displayed, then restores th= e long minibuffer prompt without changing size again when the echo area is = cleared.
=C2=A0
> OT1H we do care about point being visible when its window is partially=
> obscured by the mini-window and deliberately scroll the window in that=
> case.=C2=A0 OTOH we'd say that `follow-mode' should not care a= bout keeping
> its text coherent in that case.=C2=A0 Is that fair?

Yes.=C2=A0 In that situation, the user most probably reads the mini-= window
text anyway, and if not, then she reads the text at point.=C2=A0 The
probability that she is reading the text that will be scrolled out of
view as result of the mini-window resize is IMO minuscule.

So if, for whatever= reason, I have a timer function that displays a two-line message once a se= cond (so the echo area never goes back to its single-line state), my follow= -mode buffer will be and remain in an inconsistent state until I manually r= esize a window, when it will go back to a consistent state, but then if I c= ancel the timer (and the mini-window shrinks) it'll be in an inconsiste= nt state again, and the only way out of that one is another manual window r= esize?

I think that last case is so= mething we haven't considered yet: if I resize windows manually while t= he mini-window is enlarged, they will be in an inconsistent state when it g= oes back to normal, right?
--94eb2c08095ece9ed3051e4df971--