GNU bug report logs -
#4535
toolkit dependence of frame-height
Previous Next
Reported by: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:20:03 UTC
Severity: normal
Done: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 4535 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 4535 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
:
bug#4535
; Package
emacs
.
(Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:20:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #3 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):
As far as I can tell, the result of (frame-height) on GNU/Linux
depends on the X toolkit on the following way:
gtk : excludes both tool-bar and menu-bar
motif : includes tool-bar (height = 2?), excludes menu-bar
lucid : like motif
no toolkit : includes both tool-bar and menu-bar (height = 1)
-nw : includes menu-bar
The motif and lucid values seems inconsistent with the Elisp manual:
These values include the internal borders, and windows' scroll
bars and fringes (which belong to individual windows, not to the
frame itself), but do not include menu bars or tool bars (except
when using X without an X toolkit).
I am happy to update the documentation, if the current behaviour (and
my understanding of it) is correct, or not going to be changed. (It is
rather confusing though.)
Some previous discussion:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2007-12/msg00103.html
and to some extent bug #25
Information forwarded
to
bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
:
bug#4535
; Package
emacs
.
(Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:25:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
"Jan D." <jan.h.d <at> swipnet.se>
:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to
Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
.
(Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:25:05 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):
Your understanding is correct. Please update the docs. However, it has
been an old goal to unify this, i.e. make all toolkits behave as Gtk.
Jan D.
23 sep 2009 kl. 08.57 skrev Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>:
>
> As far as I can tell, the result of (frame-height) on GNU/Linux
> depends on the X toolkit on the following way:
>
> gtk : excludes both tool-bar and menu-bar
> motif : includes tool-bar (height = 2?), excludes menu-bar
> lucid : like motif
> no toolkit : includes both tool-bar and menu-bar (height = 1)
> -nw : includes menu-bar
>
> The motif and lucid values seems inconsistent with the Elisp manual:
>
> These values include the internal borders, and windows' scroll
> bars and fringes (which belong to individual windows, not to the
> frame itself), but do not include menu bars or tool bars (except
> when using X without an X toolkit).
>
> I am happy to update the documentation, if the current behaviour (and
> my understanding of it) is correct, or not going to be changed. (It is
> rather confusing though.)
>
>
> Some previous discussion:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2007-12/msg00103.html
>
> and to some extent bug #25
>
>
>
Information forwarded
to
bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
:
bug#4535
; Package
emacs
.
(Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:25:07 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
"Jan D." <jan.h.d <at> swipnet.se>
:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to
Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
.
(Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:25:07 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
:
bug#4535
; Package
emacs
.
(Thu, 24 Sep 2009 03:35:07 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #16 received at 4535 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):
"Jan D." wrote:
> Your understanding is correct. Please update the docs.
Will do.
Do the menu bar and tool bar always have height 1 and 2 respectively,
or are these numbers variable and/or approximate?
Information forwarded
to
bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
:
bug#4535
; Package
emacs
.
(Thu, 24 Sep 2009 07:10:11 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to
Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
.
(Thu, 24 Sep 2009 07:10:11 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #21 received at 4535 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):
> Do the menu bar and tool bar always have height 1 and 2 respectively,
> or are these numbers variable and/or approximate?
It depends on what "always have height 1 and 2" stand for. On Windows I
can easily make the menubar occupy three "lines" of my screen estate.
And AFAICT such behavior can make frame-size calculations completely
random because Emacs (probably due to limitations of the Windos API)
does not allow me to get the actual size of my frame in lines.
martin
Information forwarded
to
bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
:
bug#4535
; Package
emacs
.
(Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:50:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #24 received at 4535 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):
martin rudalics wrote:
>> Do the menu bar and tool bar always have height 1 and 2 respectively,
>> or are these numbers variable and/or approximate?
>
> It depends on what "always have height 1 and 2" stand for.
Well, I hadn't thought it through, because lines may have a variable
height. Duh.
And I can increase the buffer font-size many times over without
changing the result of frame-height (or -width), so now I don't
understand what "number of lines available for display" in the doc of
frame-height means.
I guess it means number of lines in units of the default face? So I
guess that's what my original question meant.
> On Windows I can easily make the menubar occupy three "lines" of my
> screen estate. And AFAICT such behavior can make frame-size
> calculations completely random because Emacs (probably due to
> limitations of the Windos API) does not allow me to get the actual
> size of my frame in lines.
I'm not going to be able to document the Windows behaviour in any
case; maybe you'd like to do that?
Information forwarded
to
bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
:
bug#4535
; Package
emacs
.
(Fri, 25 Sep 2009 07:50:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to
Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
.
(Fri, 25 Sep 2009 07:50:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #29 received at 4535 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):
>> It depends on what "always have height 1 and 2" stand for.
>
> Well, I hadn't thought it through, because lines may have a variable
> height. Duh.
>
> And I can increase the buffer font-size many times over without
> changing the result of frame-height (or -width), so now I don't
> understand what "number of lines available for display" in the doc of
> frame-height means.
>
> I guess it means number of lines in units of the default face? So I
> guess that's what my original question meant.
Most frame variables seem to have a historical interpretation which
somehow got lost with the evolution of GUIs and the adaptations to
different operating systems and toolkits. Thinking of frame sizes in
lines and columns is asking for trouble in anything but a text-only
environment. Documenting the current behavior seems next to impossible
to me.
> I'm not going to be able to document the Windows behaviour in any
> case; maybe you'd like to do that?
I can't. I don't understand it. But I'll gladly read anything you come
up with for other platforms ;-)
martin
Reply sent
to
Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:15:05 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:15:06 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #34 received at 4535-done <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):
I have tried to document this as well as I can (though I don't feel I
understand it all).
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
.
(Sun, 08 Nov 2009 15:24:35 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 15 years and 231 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.