bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Chong Yidong]

emacs -q
M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
C-h n
C-v
C-l
C-l
C-l

The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the window, unlike
the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of recenter-top-bottom.

bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Drew Adams]

> emacs -q
> M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
> C-h n
> C-v
> C-l
> C-l
> C-l
> 
> The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the 
> window, unlike the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of
> recenter-top-bottom.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bug report, but by design `scroll-conservatively'
modifies the behavior of `recenter-top-bottom'. As the doc string says:

  "Top and bottom destinations are actually
   `scroll-conservatively' lines from true window top
   and bottom."

Is what you see different from what the doc string states?

bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Chong Yidong]

"Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> emacs -q
>> M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
>> C-h n
>> C-v
>> C-l
>> C-l
>> C-l
>> 
>> The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the 
>> window, unlike the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of
>> recenter-top-bottom.
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bug report, but by design
> `scroll-conservatively' modifies the behavior of
> `recenter-top-bottom'. As the doc string says:
>
>   "Top and bottom destinations are actually
>    `scroll-conservatively' lines from true window top
>    and bottom."

That's true; I didn't see that.

But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls down by one
and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.

I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
scroll-conservatively.

What do people think?

bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Dan Nicolaescu]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

  > "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
  > 
  > >> emacs -q
  > >> M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
  > >> C-h n
  > >> C-v
  > >> C-l
  > >> C-l
  > >> C-l
  > >> 
  > >> The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the 
  > >> window, unlike the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of
  > >> recenter-top-bottom.
  > >
  > > Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bug report, but by design
  > > `scroll-conservatively' modifies the behavior of
  > > `recenter-top-bottom'. As the doc string says:
  > >
  > >   "Top and bottom destinations are actually
  > >    `scroll-conservatively' lines from true window top
  > >    and bottom."
  > 
  > That's true; I didn't see that.
  > 
  > But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
  > people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
  > that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls down by one
  > and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
  > top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
  > sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.
  > 
  > I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
  > scroll-conservatively.

IMHO, that makes more sense. 

Re: bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Dan Nicolaescu]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

  > "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
  > 
  > >> emacs -q
  > >> M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
  > >> C-h n
  > >> C-v
  > >> C-l
  > >> C-l
  > >> C-l
  > >> 
  > >> The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the 
  > >> window, unlike the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of
  > >> recenter-top-bottom.
  > >
  > > Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bug report, but by design
  > > `scroll-conservatively' modifies the behavior of
  > > `recenter-top-bottom'. As the doc string says:
  > >
  > >   "Top and bottom destinations are actually
  > >    `scroll-conservatively' lines from true window top
  > >    and bottom."
  > 
  > That's true; I didn't see that.
  > 
  > But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
  > people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
  > that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls down by one
  > and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
  > top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
  > sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.
  > 
  > I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
  > scroll-conservatively.

IMHO, that makes more sense. 

Re: bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Chong Yidong]

"Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> emacs -q
>> M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
>> C-h n
>> C-v
>> C-l
>> C-l
>> C-l
>> 
>> The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the 
>> window, unlike the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of
>> recenter-top-bottom.
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bug report, but by design
> `scroll-conservatively' modifies the behavior of
> `recenter-top-bottom'. As the doc string says:
>
>   "Top and bottom destinations are actually
>    `scroll-conservatively' lines from true window top
>    and bottom."

That's true; I didn't see that.

But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls down by one
and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.

I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
scroll-conservatively.

What do people think?

bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Drew Adams]

> >> emacs -q
> >> M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
> >> C-h n
> >> C-v
> >> C-l
> >> C-l
> >> C-l
> >> 
> >> The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the 
> >> window, unlike the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of
> >> recenter-top-bottom.
> >
> > Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bug report, but by design
> > `scroll-conservatively' modifies the behavior of
> > `recenter-top-bottom'. As the doc string says:
> >
> >   "Top and bottom destinations are actually
> >    `scroll-conservatively' lines from true window top
> >    and bottom."
> 
> That's true; I didn't see that.
> 
> But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
> people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
> that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls 
> down by one
> and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
> top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
> sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.
> 
> I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
> scroll-conservatively.
> 
> What do people think?

I believe this (below) was the last message in the thread that discussed this.
AFAIK, nothing was decided about using a different user option or rationalizing
the various uses and doc for `scroll-conservatively'.

---------------8<---------------------------
> From: Drew Adams Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 8:54 PM
> To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Subject: RE: recenter-top-bottom
> 
> > the doc string of scroll-step says this:
> > 
> >     "If you want scrolling to always be a line at a time, 
> >      you should set `scroll-conservatively' to a large
> >      value rather than set this to 1."
> 
> Where "this" refers to `scroll-step', not 
> `scroll-conservatively', presumably. That could be made 
> clearer, BTW. And "a large value" could be made clearer also: 
> example? What's large?
> 
> > When scroll-conservatively is changed, it's usually for 
> > this reason, I think. (See Richard's explanation.)
> 
> 1. Then change the `recenter-top-bottom' code to use a new 
> user option, or some other existing option that is more 
> appropriate than `scroll-conservatively'.
> 
> 2. FWIW, the manual, the `scroll-step' doc string, and 
> Richard seem to be saying different things. The manual 
> (Emacs, node Auto Scrolling) says that you can use "a small 
> number" for `scroll-conservatively' to scroll "the text just 
> far enough to bring point back on screen". The doc string of 
> `scroll-step' says that you can use "a large value" for 
> `scroll-conservatively' to scroll "a line at a time". Those 
> can both be true, but they would seem to be different uses of 
> the option. 
> 
> Richard says that he sets `scroll-conservatively' to a large 
> value to "bring point onto the screen by scrolling, with even 
> one line of overlap". That doesn't seem to be the same thing 
> as scrolling "a line at a time".
> 
> I'm not saying that anyone is wrong or that the doc should be 
> changed (I don't know). And I'm no longer claiming that 
> `scroll-conservatively' is appropriate for 
> `recenter-top-bottom' (use some other option, if you like). 
> I'm saying only that the uses or interpretations of 
> `scroll-conservatively' seem various.

RE: bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Drew Adams]

> >> emacs -q
> >> M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
> >> C-h n
> >> C-v
> >> C-l
> >> C-l
> >> C-l
> >> 
> >> The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the 
> >> window, unlike the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of
> >> recenter-top-bottom.
> >
> > Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bug report, but by design
> > `scroll-conservatively' modifies the behavior of
> > `recenter-top-bottom'. As the doc string says:
> >
> >   "Top and bottom destinations are actually
> >    `scroll-conservatively' lines from true window top
> >    and bottom."
> 
> That's true; I didn't see that.
> 
> But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
> people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
> that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls 
> down by one
> and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
> top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
> sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.
> 
> I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
> scroll-conservatively.
> 
> What do people think?

I believe this (below) was the last message in the thread that discussed this.
AFAIK, nothing was decided about using a different user option or rationalizing
the various uses and doc for `scroll-conservatively'.

---------------8<---------------------------
> From: Drew Adams Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 8:54 PM
> To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Subject: RE: recenter-top-bottom
> 
> > the doc string of scroll-step says this:
> > 
> >     "If you want scrolling to always be a line at a time, 
> >      you should set `scroll-conservatively' to a large
> >      value rather than set this to 1."
> 
> Where "this" refers to `scroll-step', not 
> `scroll-conservatively', presumably. That could be made 
> clearer, BTW. And "a large value" could be made clearer also: 
> example? What's large?
> 
> > When scroll-conservatively is changed, it's usually for 
> > this reason, I think. (See Richard's explanation.)
> 
> 1. Then change the `recenter-top-bottom' code to use a new 
> user option, or some other existing option that is more 
> appropriate than `scroll-conservatively'.
> 
> 2. FWIW, the manual, the `scroll-step' doc string, and 
> Richard seem to be saying different things. The manual 
> (Emacs, node Auto Scrolling) says that you can use "a small 
> number" for `scroll-conservatively' to scroll "the text just 
> far enough to bring point back on screen". The doc string of 
> `scroll-step' says that you can use "a large value" for 
> `scroll-conservatively' to scroll "a line at a time". Those 
> can both be true, but they would seem to be different uses of 
> the option. 
> 
> Richard says that he sets `scroll-conservatively' to a large 
> value to "bring point onto the screen by scrolling, with even 
> one line of overlap". That doesn't seem to be the same thing 
> as scrolling "a line at a time".
> 
> I'm not saying that anyone is wrong or that the doc should be 
> changed (I don't know). And I'm no longer claiming that 
> `scroll-conservatively' is appropriate for 
> `recenter-top-bottom' (use some other option, if you like). 
> I'm saying only that the uses or interpretations of 
> `scroll-conservatively' seem various.

Re: bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively

[Chong Yidong]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
> people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
> that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls down by one
> and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
> top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
> sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.
>
> I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
> scroll-conservatively.

I've changed C-l to use scroll-margin instead of scroll-conservatively.

bug#736: marked as done (C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively)

[Emacs bug Tracking System]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 866 bytes --]


Your message dated Sun, 17 Aug 2008 23:47:51 -0400
with message-id <87d4k77zmg.fsf@stupidchicken.com>
and subject line Re: bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively
has caused the Emacs bug report #736,
regarding C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact don@donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


-- 
736: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact don@donarmstrong.com with problems

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1941 bytes --]

From: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Subject: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 11:30:07 -0400
Message-ID: <873al3u0ao.fsf@stupidchicken.com>

emacs -q
M-: (setq scroll-conservatively 100) RET
C-h n
C-v
C-l
C-l
C-l

The repeated C-l's don't move to the top or bottom of the window, unlike
the usual behavior (new to Emacs 23) of recenter-top-bottom.




[-- Attachment #3: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1935 bytes --]

From: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>
To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Cc: 736-done@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
Subject: Re: bug#736: C-l interacts badly with scroll-conservatively
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 23:47:51 -0400
Message-ID: <87d4k77zmg.fsf@stupidchicken.com>

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> But why does recenter-top-bottom use scroll-conservatively?  AFAICT,
> people often use a large nonzero number for scroll-conservatively so
> that when point is at the bottom of the window, C-n scrolls down by one
> and keeps the cursor at the bottom; and similarly, if point is at the
> top of the window, C-p keeps the cursor at the top.  It doesn't make
> sense to make scroll-conservatively affect C-l.
>
> I think we should use scroll-margin for this purpose, rather than
> scroll-conservatively.

I've changed C-l to use scroll-margin instead of scroll-conservatively.