[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption
From: |
Lennart Borgman |
Subject: |
Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption |
Date: |
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 03:17:31 +0200 |
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Stefan Monnier
<address@hidden> wrote:
>>> However I dislike the way the problem is solved. I would rather wish
>>> that the display engine instead calculated a new window start point
>>> from the input command queue. I have no idea if that is actually
>>> possible.
>> I think it's impossible. How can you guess the effect of list of
>> arbitrary input events on the display, without actually redisplaying?
>
> Indeed what he suggests is probably impossible. But the end result he's
> after is definitely possible: move the window-start as little as possible
> (tho still, line by line) to keep point displayed.
Though it is not easy to understand what is happening.
I believed I safely could assume that save_restriction_save and
save_restriction_restore always was called in pair. Is not that the
case?
I do not understand the output I see. I added a counter, initialized
to 0, that is incremented when entering save_restriction_save and
decremented when exiting ..._restore. It looks like it becomes -1
right at the end before "jumping scrolling". Maybe this is just my bad
C fu. Can I do
DebPrint (("%d", current_buffer));
where current_buffer is a Lisp_Object? Or does that result in some overflow?
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, (continued)
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Stefan Monnier, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption,
Lennart Borgman <=
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/17