[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#13133: 24.2.90; scroll-conservatively is too coarse a setting
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#13133: 24.2.90; scroll-conservatively is too coarse a setting |
Date: |
Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:09:59 +0200 |
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 06:07:11 +0400
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> CC: 13133@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> On 10.12.2012 12:52, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 12:28:58 +0400
> >> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> >> CC: 13133@debbugs.gnu.org
> >>
> >> Like I mentioned, I don't want C-M-e/C-M-a to recenter. Why do you think
> >> it's TRT?
> >
> > Because you generally want to see the entire definition of the API,
> > not just the opening brace or paren.
>
> Not sure if I understand you here. For example, if I'm in an Elisp
> function, I can press C-M-a to go to its beginning, and the whole
> definition (including arglist and docstring) will be visible. If the
> value of scroll-conservatively is small, though, the function body may
> be cut in half.
> Or do you specifically mean non-lisp languages where the docstring is
> above the function definition?
Yes, the latter.
> >> As far as I'm concerned, recentering might be fine when we go to the end
> >> of a small function (it will fit on the screen anyway), but a larger
> >> function, which might have fit on the full screen, will be cut in half.
> >
> > IMO, C-M-e/C-M-a is not for observing the whole function. You may be
> > looking for a separate feature, or maybe a modification of an existing
> > feature.
>
> I don't think you can reasonably decide what they are for.
I didn't decide anything, I just gave you my interpretation. That's
what "IMO" is for.
> > Can you cook up a test case? I'd like to see why this happens. (If
> > showing this requires injection of specific amount of text into the
> > compilation buffer, you could use 'cat' or some similar program to do
> > so, instead of actually running a compiler.)
>
> Here's one:
Thanks, I'll take a look.