[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: What improvements would be truly useful?

From: Daniele Nicolodi
Subject: Re: What improvements would be truly useful?
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 23:32:28 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0

On 05/03/2018 12:22, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Daniele Nicolodi <address@hidden>
>> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 11:51:09 -0700
>> I think that what will help to keep Emacs relevant in the long run is
>> modernizing its structure and code base, moving away from the baroque
>> architecture that developed as a result of its very long history (and
>> some less than optimally future proof design decisions).
> What exactly are you talking about here?  AFAIK, the Emacs
> architecture didn't change since its inception, so its long history
> has no relevance here.  But maybe I'm missing something or
> misunderstanding what you intended to convey.

I'm far from being familiar with the Emacs codebase thus I may be
reporting something that it is not completely true, however: Emacs was
born as a console only application, the graphical user interface seems
to be duct taped on.  Also, GTK support seems a bit of an hack that
requires layering violations (reaching down to the X primitives) to
work.  Being GTK the only modern toolkit supported on Linux (as far as I
know) and the only way to get nartive Wayland support, some radical
cleanup in that area would probably be a good thing.
>> What would improve my user experience would be improvements to the
>> display engine that will allow a better document viewing
>> capabilities in something like pdf-tools (like continuous
>> scrolling).
> AFAIU, that's already possible from the display engine POV, what's
> missing is application-level Lisp code that would take advantage of
> the infrastructure.

Reading the pdf-tools bug report on the matter, I had the impression
that implementing this was not possible because of some Emacs
limitations.  I'm happy if that's not the case.  I'll go and investigate


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]