[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption
From: |
Lennart Borgman |
Subject: |
Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption |
Date: |
Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:32:07 +0200 |
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
>> From: Lennart Borgman <address@hidden>
>> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:56:38 +0200
>> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
>>
>> Can you please explain why window_end_valid flag should be involved?
>
> This flag indicates that the redisplay finished and the current glyph
> matrix is up to date. It is imperative to know that, because
> try_scrolling, the function you are trying to get called, reuses
> portions of the current glyph matrix (to avoid redrawing the entire
> window). It is unsafe to reuse the current matrix if it is not
> guaranteed to be up to date.
Thanks, that is a clear description.
But how is that involved here? I save the old clipping in
reconsider_clip_changes when window_end_valid is non-nil. (Or do I
misread the code there because of the bans I have that forbid me to
read C code corretly?)
>> Can you please also comment on the point where to check if clipping
>> has changed? Is not the entry of redisplay_window the right point for
>> this?
>
> What do you mean by ``where to check if clipping has changed''? The
> clip_changed flag is checked in many places during redisplay.
Sorry, I was unclear. I meant where it is set to 1. narrow_to_region
etc set it to 1 and that is not something they should do since they do
not (and should not) know about the redisplay state.
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, (continued)
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Stefan Monnier, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/16
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption,
Lennart Borgman <=
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/17
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/18
- Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption, David Engster, 2010/06/17