GNU bug report logs - #60703
Patches to xwidget code

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Andrew De Angelis <bobodeangelis <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: luangruo <at> yahoo.com, 60703 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#60703: Patches to xwidget code
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 18:45:33 -0500

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

Thanks for the explanation. I sent out the signed copy yesterday.
I noticed a couple things about the previous patch, so I'm sending this one
with a few updates:

   - `xwidget-webkit-current-url` in lisp/xwidget.el: check if the url
   variable is non-nil before calling `kill-new' on it. This avoids killing an
   empty string, which would be pointless. We still alert the user that
   something's wrong by messaging "URL: nil" (although getting a nil url seems
   very unlikely).
   - in src/nsxwidget.m: formatting (keep lines below 80 char), and a brief
   comment describing the purpose of some of the newly added functions


I'm also attaching a draft of the ChangeLog. Let me know if you'd like me
to make any changes there.

I do have a question about the X11/GTK implementations for xwidget. I'm not
sure I understand the relationship between the two: from the preprocessor
macros it seems at times they are separate and at times that one is an
addendum to the other.
I'm asking because I want to make sure I'm using the preprocessor macros
correctly: specifically, the function
`xwidget-webkit-estimated-load-progress` within xwidget.c used to be inside
a "#ifdef USE_GTK" block. I moved it outside of the block, and separated
the GTK implementation from the NS_IMPL_COCOA implementation. Is this a
problem for the X11 build? Should I instead put the whole function within a
block along these lines: "#if defined USE_GTK || defined NS_IMPL_COCOA" ?


On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 10:41 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Andrew De Angelis <bobodeangelis <at> gmail.com>
> > Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2023 10:32:19 -0500
> > Cc: luangruo <at> yahoo.com, 60703 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> > Sorry about the confusion!
> > Looks like I missed that reply.
> > Some quick clarification though: the first assignment I sent out was for
> some modifications to shell.el
> > (bug#60385; see also the thread "New Package: sticky-shell" in
> emacs-devel: I had a package idea and it
> > was mentioned to add it as a feature instead). I then 1) missed the
> reply from copyright-clerk <at> fsf.org, 2)
> > assumed I'd need an additional copyright assignment for the
> xwidget-patch, as it concerns different files.
> > Is the first assignment good enough for all subsequent files I change?
> If that's the case I'll go ahead and sign
> > it and send it back asap. Just wanted to make sure I'm following the
> correct procedure.
>
> The assignment will be good for all your future contributions to
> Emacs, but first you need to do what the copyright clerk asked you to
> do: print the PDF form, sign it, scan it, and email it back.  Then
> you'll get another email saying that your paperwork is complete, and
> then we can accept contributions from you.
>
> Thanks.
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[ChangeLog.andrewda (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

[xwidget-patches-2.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Previous Next

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