GNU bug report logs - #10600
24.0.92; `describe-char': text properties and [Show]

Previous Next

Full log

Message #26 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Kevin Rodgers <kevin.d.rodgers <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#10600: 24.0.92; `describe-char': text properties and [Show]
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 00:01:13 -0700

On 1/28/12 10:15 AM, Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 22:43, Drew Adams<drew.adams <at> oracle.com>  wrote:
...
>> For another thing, the width of the window chosen to display the *Help* buffer
>> text can depend on the width of that buffer text.  That we do not do that often
>> today is not a reason not to allow for it.  That is exactly what I do with
>> frames, for example: I fit the frame to the buffer text, and I rely upon the
>> help functions to produce a reasonable buffer layout.
>
> So you're computing the window (and frame) width from the buffer text,
> and complaining that you don't like how the buffer text is
> distributed, because it exceeds the maximum width you want to give to
> a window or frame. But, as reflowing the buffer text according to the
> window width would defeat your method, the only option left is to
> chose an arbitrary limit and stick to it, even if, in some cases, a
> different width is best for most users...
>
> In many, but not all, *Help* buffers, reflowing or not reflowing their
> contents is largely irrelevant. But for the output of describe-char,
> the way it is now is IMHO much, *much* better that what you proposed
> before (getting rid of the right-alignment of field names), and
> certainly I don't think reflowing it would improve things, on the
> contrary it would make them less clear.
>
>> But in that case, the key is to know what the display window is.  That is a far
>> cry from what we do today, which is to use the current window to guess the width
>> of the to-be-displayed *Help* window.  That makes no sense at all.
>
> I wouldn't go as far as to say that it does "make no sense at all",
> because it obviously works in many common cases. But it is erroneous,
> sure.
>
>> Yes there is, or there should be a wrap, for doc strings provided by Emacs itself.
>
> On the contrary, I disagree on that "should be". *Help* buffers try to
> give useful information, and manual reflowing is almost always better
> than automatic reflowing. It fails for some narrow windows, but that's
> why we use 70 chars or so as a limit. Automatic reflow to support the
> likely very few users who use extremelly narrow windows seems a waste
> and a step back.

Would it be feasible to create a temporary *Help* buffer/window/frame
with no text at all, which is "displayed" by Emacs but not rendered to
the user (i.e. not mapped by the terminal / window system), for the
purpose of querying its width and using that value when filling the real
*Help* buffer text?

-- 
Kevin Rodgers
Denver, Colorado, USA

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.