From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Disabling mouse input Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2024 21:56:31 -0400 Message-ID: References: <86sesaytjn.fsf@gnu.org> <4p6cs2adzzqihjdustvlklr3ykrrz7eq7rtz2ciywcyevgmoej@klyfgnsjtnti> <86h68py3zy.fsf@gnu.org> <86fro9y3ki.fsf@gnu.org> <86bjyxy1nh.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="15460"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Radetsky Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 03 02:57:20 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1t7Prk-0003uI-A6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 03 Nov 2024 02:57:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t7PrA-0004Sn-B5; Sat, 02 Nov 2024 21:56:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t7Pr9-0004Sd-7o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2024 21:56:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t7Pr7-0000a4-Fh; Sat, 02 Nov 2024 21:56:42 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3AE788053B; Sat, 2 Nov 2024 21:56:38 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1730598993; bh=mYblCUSA51H8OpVBIXXrKs+c6VDcJHv1+NJebtlftmU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ZAnfDaobrxNkNgc4ppxbY+83pleP8nodw5ccwhzTBbfJHLOuG2ZRfueXwjiD6TZ8F gDUyd9XnU0GQcwJnAdlq9W1ErLi7aWtGo9tnC2szjbK1ghJpSH/hP+MuoHF04rQz0D n5k+DXw+8wUGe8D4FTiDDGkb4+gG0Dd5AAyR2YW85XrSOw8I18Pvqj1AKgHpClRayA S7U0wyc5WzAAeCStHtwoBNu+xaub9xs/OjsYKjmt5DhjvwTfdJg9425pKSlWjlIul1 aLGBSrPvRH3C38KKj1sLFQhtb68WL+Y6/DyCz+Qot0//urgI+1H4csOrwW9uv+GqRK MaBcXqSHI5aew== Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3076A80152; Sat, 2 Nov 2024 21:56:33 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from pastel (104-195-225-43.cpe.teksavvy.com [104.195.225.43]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E74A61202D5; Sat, 2 Nov 2024 21:56:32 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Daniel Radetsky's message of "Sat, 2 Nov 2024 16:09:25 -0700") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:325038 Archived-At: >> While I'm sure other people are faced with the same problem, I can't see >> any evidence that it's a very common wish, so I'd rather not make the >> C input code even more hairy than it already is by adding ad-hoc code >> for that if there's a way to get 99% of the result with >> a Lisp-only solution. > While I think you underestimate the frequency, Let me rephrase: I do believe the problem of accidental touchpad events is common, but there are *many* ways to attack this problem, each with their own set tradeoffs. So I think we should aim to provide tools which make it possible to provide a very customizable behavior, since every user will prefer particular tradeoffs. For that reason, I'm in favor of adding generic support but not ad-hoc support. > I agree with your concern and your suggestion looks intriguing so I'm > going to test it. I'm curious to know how it works for your use case. If you encounter problems, do report them so we can see if maybe there's a way to provide solutions for them. Stefan