GNU bug report logs - #40784
Clarifying the difference between fringe bitmaps and XBM images

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#40784: closed (Clarifying the difference between fringe
 bitmaps and XBM images)
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 10:00:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Sat, 25 Apr 2020 12:59:31 +0300
with message-id <83blnf998c.fsf <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#40784: Clarifying the difference between fringe bitmaps and XBM images
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #40784,
regarding Clarifying the difference between fringe bitmaps and XBM images
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
40784: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=40784
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Clément Pit-Claudel <cpitclaudel <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Clarifying the difference between fringe bitmaps and XBM images
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:52:23 -0400

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi all,

I was experimenting with XBM images today and it took me a while to realize that the bits in XBM and fringe bitmaps are not in the same order.  The attached patch attempts to highlight this.

Cheers,
Clément.

[0001-Point-out-the-difference-in-bit-order-between-fringe.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[Message part 5 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Clément Pit-Claudel <cpitclaudel <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 40784-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#40784: Clarifying the difference between fringe bitmaps and
 XBM images
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 12:59:31 +0300

> Cc: 40784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Clément Pit-Claudel <cpitclaudel <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 11:44:13 -0400
> 
> > If so, then why do we need to mention this in the doc string?  Won't
> > the manual be enough?  It is strange to mention just this factoid in
> > the doc strings, when one can shoot themselves in the foot with
> > bitmapped images in many exciting ways.
> 
> The docstrings are usually good enough that I seldom read the manuals :/
> Having a brief warning in the docstring is useful in that case.  But I'm happy to yield to your judgement.

Thanks, I've updated the manual with this caveat.

Previous Next

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