[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively'
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively' |
Date: |
Mon, 28 Nov 2011 07:01:17 -0500 |
> Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:38:05 +0100
> From: Dani Moncayo <dmoncayo@gmail.com>
> Cc: 10105@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> 1. Eval: "(setq scroll-conservatively 101)".
> 2. Eval: "(custom-set-faces '(mode-line ((t (:box (:line-width 1))))))".
> 3. Visit the attached file.
> 4. Type "C-s p C-s C-s C-s".
> --> At this point, the Isearch has moved point to line "p1", but it's
> positioned at the top of the window. It should be at the bottom.
I'm quite sure this is by design: the last C-s scrolls _up_, which
under scroll-conservatively means Emacs should put point at the
topmost line. If you'd get to that line by C-p, that would be where
point should be displayed, right?
Why did you expect it to be at the bottom?
And does the custom-set-faces even make a difference (I cannot test
that where I'm typing this)?
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Dani Moncayo, 2011/11/22
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Eli Zaretskii, 2011/11/25
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Eli Zaretskii, 2011/11/25
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Dani Moncayo, 2011/11/25
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Dani Moncayo, 2011/11/28
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively',
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Dani Moncayo, 2011/11/28
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Eli Zaretskii, 2011/11/28
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Stefan Monnier, 2011/11/28
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Eli Zaretskii, 2011/11/28
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Juri Linkov, 2011/11/29
- bug#10105: 24.0.91; Possible bug in `scroll-conservatively', Eli Zaretskii, 2011/11/29