[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#24372: 25.1.50; After losing focus, cursor is hidden when moving poi
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#24372: 25.1.50; After losing focus, cursor is hidden when moving point |
Date: |
Sat, 01 Oct 2016 11:25:11 +0300 |
> From: Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:09:52 +0000
> Cc: 24372@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > How about a variant of this below? It uses a fixed limitation from
> > below on the delay, but only for the first blink. (The value 0.2 was
> > found by experimentation, not sure if we need to add yet another
> > defcustom for that.)
> >
> > I don't think we should introduce magic numbers or further customization
> options.
>
> It solves the problem, doesn't it? I don't mind very much if it were
> a defcustom, I just think no one would want to change it.
>
> OK, then it would be great to document the new behavior in the documentation
> of `blink-cursor-delay' and also
> clarify what "starting to blink" means.
Done.
> > > I've attached another patch with the change I have in mind.
> >
> > This has a disadvantage of creating a new timer object each time,
> > which I think we'd like to avoid: too much consing. (Also, don't you
> > need to set the timer variable to nil when the timer is disabled?)
> >
> > I don't understand - the patch doesn't create any additional timers, it
> only changes the initial delay of
> the
> > idle-timer.
>
> Each time blink-cursor--start-timer or blink-cursor--start-idle-timer
> is called, they create a new timer, right? And your patch makes us
> call these functions each time blinking is started or ended, right?
>
> No, the other patch is that it restarts the timers when the customization
> options are set. Otherwise the options
> only become effective after a focus-out/focus-in event or something similar
> that restarts the cursor.
>
> > My patch is identical, except is uses blink-cursor-interval as lower bound.
>
> Of course. That's why I said it's a minor variant.
>
> There's another difference, though: in my patch we only limit the
> first argument to run-with-timer/run-with-idle-timer, not the second.
> So only the first blink cycle is affected.
>
> Doesn't that mean that the adjusted delay is applied only after the first
> command, but not after subsequent
> commands?
No, not AFAIK. The idle time starts anew after each command.
Is there anything left to do about this, or can we close this bug?
Thanks.
- bug#24372: 25.1.50; After losing focus, cursor is hidden when moving point,
Eli Zaretskii <=