Re: "... the window start at a meaningless point within a line."

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Eli.

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 08:46:48PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 14:53:56 +0000
> > Cc: address@hidden
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden>

[ .... ]

> >    nlines = 3
> > 8. 
> > B-------WS-------------A-------L1-------------A2----\nC--------C2--------C3
> >    <---N--->                      <---------X--------->
> > (a)                           ^                                   it,T
> > (b)                                  ^                            it        
> > T

[ .... ]

> We are miscommunicating (because these diagrams are devilishly hard to
> interpret).

Sorry, I didn't realise.  Obviously they're easy for me.  Could we
possibly improve them somehow, since I find it difficult to think things
through without some sort of diagram?

For example, would it help if the actual BOLs and the xdisp BOLs were
written on separate lines?  Something like this:

      nlines = 3
Act:         WS                    L1                    C      C2     C3
8.    --------------------------^----------------------\n-------it,T-------
Xdi:  B                     A                    A2      C      C2     C3

, where ^ is the starting point, T is the target BOL and "it" is where
Fvertical_motion moves `it' to?

[ .... ]

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).