GNU bug report logs - #60703
Patches to xwidget code

Previous Next

Full log

Message #38 received at 60703 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrew De Angelis <bobodeangelis <at> gmail.com>
To: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 60703 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#60703: Patches to xwidget code
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2023 16:00:44 -0500

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

Hi all, just wanted to check on this: will you be able to include my
changes in Emacs-29?
Don't mean to put pressure or anything, just wondering if there's any
additional things you need from me, and if there's a timeline on when the
changes will be in.

Thanks!

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 7:44 PM Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com> wrote:

> Andrew De Angelis <bobodeangelis <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
> > 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" ?
>
> No, that's not a problem.  The X11 implementation shares most of the
> widget manipulation code with the PGTK one, so both are simply under
> ``#ifdef USE_GTK''.
>

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

Previous Next

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