[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#29627: 25.3; x-show-tip does not display text when x-gtk-use-tooltip
bug#29627: 25.3; x-show-tip does not display text when x-gtk-use-tooltips is nil and left/right-margin-width is set
Sun, 10 Dec 2017 15:28:55 +0100
> First, I didn't make the window a pseudo-window; it was always a
> pseudo-window. The line
> w->pseudo_window_p = true;
> existed in x-show-tip ever since Emacs 21.
Ah, sorry. I misread both ChangeLog entry and diffs (and was probably
mislead by this change
- Currently only used for menu bar windows of frames. */
+ Currently only used for menu bar windows, for tool bar windows,
+ and for tooltips. */
> I didn't feel comfortable
> with changing that now, certainly not on the release branch.
> And you will see that window_box_left does this for pseudo-windows:
> if (w->pseudo_window_p)
> return FRAME_INTERNAL_BORDER_WIDTH (f);
> which is just another example of the above-mentioned assumption about
> pseudo-windows being margin-less.
> So from_x remained (almost) zero, unlike in normal windows, and the
> already displayed text was deleted.
> For some reason that I cannot identify, and don't really care about,
> the original recipe did work until Emacs 24.3. But it could only work
> by sheer luck, or maybe something else was preventing the window of
> the tooltip frame to acquire display margins. I just made this
> official with my changes, that's all.
> As for why I forced the tip buffer have zero margins, instead of doing
> the same with the window in which that buffer is displayed, then:
> . why does it matter? the buffer is a temporary buffer generated
> specifically for showing the tip text;
> . I thought doing that with the window is more complex, what with
> all the different ways one can affect a window's parameters
> Having said all that, if you see problem(s) caused by my change,
> please describe them; I'm not married to the fix I pushed.
It's OK. My concern was that turning tooltip windows into
pseudo-windows would have meant a quite substantial change for the
Thanks for the explanations, martin