Subject: Re: bug#7296: display-pixel-height not enough

From: Lennart Borgman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 02:26:44 +0100

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 1:56 AM, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
<[email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 01:24:55 +0100, Lennart Borgman <[email-masked]> said:
>
>> Could we, as a first step, do as Eli suggested, i.e. let
>> display-pixel-height/width return the working area size instead of
>> the total display size? Is there any reason not to do this now?
>
> I'd rather suggest implementing "some of window manager emulations"
> (i.e., shortening width/height if specified one exceeds available one,
> and possibly maximized, fullwidth, and fullheight for the fullscreen
> frame parameter) on W32 and seeing if the proposed function is still
> necessary, before introducing incompatibility or new primitives.

In what way can the working display area size in pixels be
incompatible? And why is using the current total display area size
better (and more compatible)?

And how do you plan to implement the shortening without knowing what
the limits are?