[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Is this correct?
Re: Is this correct?
Sat, 26 Feb 2011 19:59:39 +1100
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)
Kevin Rodgers <address@hidden> writes:
> On 2/25/11 11:54 PM, Tim X wrote:
>> I'm currently on a big bug fix cycle. Some of the bugs I'm trying to fix
>> relate to menus and I've noticed some code which I'm not convinced is
>> "correct" based on the documentation. I'd like some
>> feedback from others as I suspect it is something I am missing or don't
>> force-mode-line-update has the following documentation -
>> ,----[ C-h f force-mode-line-update RET ]
>> | force-mode-line-update is a compiled Lisp function in `subr.el'.
>> | (force-mode-line-update&optional ALL)
>> | Force redisplay of the current buffer's mode line and header line.
>> | With optional non-nil ALL, force redisplay of all mode lines and
>> | header lines. This function also forces recomputation of the
>> | menu bar menus and the frame title.
>> | [back]
> Before digging into the details of whether the code implements the behavior
> described in the doc string, do we understand the doc string?
> * What if the current buffer is not displayed?
It isn't very clear. My assumption would be that mode-line, menu and
header lines are irrelevant for buffers that are not displayed, so would
assume if the current buffer is not displayed, do nothing?
> * Does ALL mean all buffers? All windows? All visible windows? All frames?
> All visible frames? Or some other interpretation?
Yes, its not clear to me. I have been assuming (without much
justification BTW) that ALL would mean all buffers displayed in all
frames (including frames that may be on 'other' virtual desktops (and
therefore not visible) and/or frames that may be under the current
frame. I'm not even sure if 'visible' means frames that are on other
desktops (or consoles with emacsclient etc).
> * The menu bar and frame title are frame-local, right? If so, I think that
> would imply that force-mode-line-update should by default (when ALL is nil)
> update all displayed buffers in the current frame, and should update all
> displayed buffers on all frames (when ALL is non-nil).
That would seem like a reasonable interpretation. Would those other
frames be considered visible (I've always thought so).
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au
Re: Is this correct?, Uday Reddy, 2011/02/26