bug#21415: 25.0.50; Emacs Trunk -- pixelwise width/height for x-create-frame

[Anders Lindgren]

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 3:39 PM, martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at> wrote:

>>> No, ns-auto-hide-menu-bar does not move the frame at all.
>>
>> OK.  But doesn't it remove the constraint that a frame's rectangle must
>> start somehwere at or below (0, 0)?
>
> When the menu bar is visible, OS X doesn't allow windows above the menu
> bar.

I'm not sure I understand: Do you mean here "OS X doesn't allow windows
above the top of the screen"?

It's not possible to place a window above the top of the screen if the menu bar is visible. (If I remember correctly, I haven't worked in this for quite some time.)

 

> However, OS X allows an application to place a window above the
> top of the screen -- the code in Emacs simply ensures that Emacs itself
> doesn't hinder this.

Does this "OS X allows an application to place a window above the top of
the screen" hold _only_ when the menu bar is hidden or does it hold
regardless of that?  What's such a restriction good for anyway?

Only when it is hidden (again, if I remember correctly). The reason, I guess, is to ensure that no application would ever land underneath the menu bar.

 

> -- the code in Emacs simply ensures that Emacs itself
> doesn't hinder this.

Because Emacs "normally" advices OS X to constrain the frame to the
screen.  Correct?

No, not really. A frame can stretch below the screen, and (I have to double-check this one when I get home) to either side.

When the menu bar is hidden, you can also do this above the screen.

 

> By the way, when I use Win32, I also place the title bar above the top of
> the screen,

Why?  Do you never use the fullscreen feature?

No, never.

The reason is that I want the Emacs frame to use maximal height, but at the same time I like to control the width so that I can have six side-by-side windows each with exactly 79 columns. (I use two 1600x1200 monitors and a 6x8 font, with the help of Follow mode I can see 888 consecutive lines of code.)

> so this is not a feature that is unique to the OS X port. Of
> course, for a frame the be placed above the top of the screen, the user
> must explicitly placed it there. A frame should never "just happen" to be
> placed above the top of the screen.

It will happen when it's too large and you specify negative values for
its position.

Yes, but I would see that as though the user explicitly has asked for that case.

The important thing is that it doesn't happen when a user creates a new frame using `C-x 5 2' or call `make-frame' with default parameters etc.

/ Anders