From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6EFB6DE0C42 for ; Fri, 11 May 2018 09:17:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.12 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.12 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bd3Qjm920xDJ for ; Fri, 11 May 2018 09:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com (mail-pg0-f67.google.com [74.125.83.67]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F9386DE0262 for ; Fri, 11 May 2018 09:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg0-f67.google.com with SMTP id e1-v6so2636117pga.6 for ; Fri, 11 May 2018 09:17:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=3pvrzd+5HN2rXuGZ0grl35Fx8zDevP2SneyyuHCIX5c=; b=KRUaNlrB2xxM2QDCAFqkVevVU9/vuI6NkYcDvqZ4K4u7iWgp6LZh96WabNXv3dZJXn aATkSpkLm2BxBojcacahCFhCY82aGBIJi/C1EYPve0b2+afXjfGvpXyH4L2+yUp0ylVo D8LgnPoWf+wFoetNZk0Dlw8+p34ohsL5dH8azTdQmQdQuRRBYAB/bqoa4AVAgbMruAKS cAiD+edwV3WPunMt3cGhIb7+UcjJiym6MzYGGlze/66HsCDpxE9kihi6GORWwOAF/Jb9 VS168NIdOaPN93wzD5VvU6bSUIppSxQFLMQMd3tNRigu9qRhuP/GYUqzCHdPi4Nh06ND 3fwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=3pvrzd+5HN2rXuGZ0grl35Fx8zDevP2SneyyuHCIX5c=; b=m6qPVcr5nzzEJYtYHB/YRQD3MbJFHQBfVnNOIW+B7KdihxY6NgR0CDR8rNJLJyw7Ch Q4Ab8DxDMN+LrJU7HDgZI3NgfNrDxnAkHznJvRIvivvxidWOsis44DPQyg7YnjNP+LAl iUK31pX4WhVXXg/uE1wmCSS/Mgv0rfuHi6UCmS+H+nnFRzZ4tsdR8+DhCBLu8vM8UZOv rCtVo1O1HwGdaMnTNIt6ytO0vsA/5cf+MsGAXpmUm0htPm+C17Upucu0yozWZPGMjddr Ulj05vohhADkh9p2g/IKyL/F9IeRZy0C7hJSuYJqzSp3k7A4lkwEzPiNa6oOmJKlGx26 Abmg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwcotVvKFOcQi+SeShNj21dgfllMXVvBSw5iofeqxAqW1G6MA4CE E54Hz3OsS84UW01hWEkiC3QkZv5h X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZoncfF5FjSg+6FstZRdGDST1XVfExXQgPQii7+ElfMAHGymEiTfHUcZnwLnSg1N3Ma8KOfw5A== X-Received: by 2002:a62:d508:: with SMTP id d8-v6mr6021586pfg.234.1526055472203; Fri, 11 May 2018 09:17:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.1.1] ([42.106.14.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r30-v6sm13171376pgu.89.2018.05.11.09.17.49 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 May 2018 09:17:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Prof Jayanth R Varma To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: emacs: Split wide window vertically for tree mode message pane In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 21:47:33 +0530 Message-ID: <87r2mi2mle.fsf@JRVLAPTOP.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 16:17:54 -0000 On Wed, May 09 2018, David Bremner wrote: > Prof Jayanth R Varma writes: >> This patch modifies the function notmuch-tree-show-message-in >> in notmuch-tree.el to split the window vertically while >> creating a message pane in tree-mode if the window is wider >> than 160 (so that after splitting, the message pane can show >> the standard 76 character plain text email lines without >> wrapping). > 2) I noticed that the horizontal splitting leads to truncation > of tag display. So I think not everyone will want this (it would > be pretty frustrating to widen the emacs frame to see a full tag > list, just to have it truncated). One option would be to control > the splitting by a variable specifying the minimum width at > which to switch to horizonal splitting. I agree that the customization option is superior to my original patch. The default value of the customization variable could be set equal to the emacs variable "most-positive-fixnum" (the largest value that is representable in a Lisp integer) so that the patch would not have an impact for anybody who does not explicitly customize it. > 3) The commit message / NEWS talks about splitting the window > vertically, but that seems contrary to the emacs terminology (as > evinced by the source code in the patch) My mistake: vertically should be changed to horizontally in the commit message, NEWS and source code comments.