GNU bug report logs - #38187
27.0.50; No mouse-wheel scaling on images

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>

Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 21:11:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 27.0.50

Fixed in version 27.1

Done: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Alan Third <alan <at> idiocy.org>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, 38187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, juri <at> linkov.net
Subject: bug#38187: 27.0.50; No mouse-wheel scaling on images
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:26:42 +0200
> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:33:00 +0000
> From: Alan Third <alan <at> idiocy.org>
> Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 38187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefan <at> marxist.se,
> 	juri <at> linkov.net
> 
> > > A simple ‘solution’ to the mousewheel scaling issue would be to
> > > explicitly flush the old image from the cache on each change. I think
> > > that’s what image mode does when you zoom.
> > 
> > image-mode can do that when it knows the scaled image will replace the
> > previous one, yes.  (We will need to add an API for that, I think.)
> > But that's not cache eviction, that's application being smarter about
> > the "garbage" it produces.
> 
> Actually, now I look at the code, when an image is resized using the
> mousewheel the previous image should already be flushed.
> 
> In image.el we have this function:
> 
> (defun image--get-imagemagick-and-warn ()
>   (unless (or (fboundp 'imagemagick-types) (image-transforms-p))
>     (error "Cannot rescale images on this terminal"))
>   (let ((image (image--get-image)))
>     (image-flush image)    ;;; <<---------------
>     (when (and (fboundp 'imagemagick-types)
>                (not (image-transforms-p)))
>       (plist-put (cdr image) :type 'imagemagick))
>     image))
> 
> which is called every time an image is resized. So perhaps I
> misunderstand what image-flush does, or we do have a memory leak?

Strange indeed.  I suggest to step in a debugger through this and
other relevant code in this scenario, and see what happens there.  I'd
be surprised to know that we have a memory leak in this area.




This bug report was last modified 5 years and 237 days ago.

Previous Next


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