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

From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:46:06 +0900

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

>> 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)?

I mean compatibility with previous versions.

It looks unnatural that we can't know the offsets of the available
display area, if we are to have primitives to get its size.  Also we
need to consider multiple-monitor environment.

Anyway, no matter how you try to specify position/size in detail at
the Lisp level, additional constraints are forced by the window
manager on X11 and the Cocoa framework on Mac OS X.  And such
additional constraints actually solve the problem in your motivating
example in the first place.  It looks more natural to implement such
constraints in the remaining environment, i.e., W32.

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

Of course they are used, but just internally.

				     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
				[email-masked]