lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: lynx-dev size_change code


From: Klaus Weide
Subject: Re: lynx-dev size_change code
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 02:41:24 -0600 (CST)

On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Webmaster Jim wrote:

> I have never had complete success changing the Lynx screen size and
> then filling the screen with a redraw. 

What does incomplete success mean for you?

In my experience, changing the screen size works in that eventually
Lynx recognizes the new size and formats newly loaded texts according
to it.  But it does not result in automatic appropriate reformatting
of the current document, or any documents in the cache.

In other words, you need ^R, not just ^L.

The first key (any key, not just ^L) after the change causes some
basic vertical readjustment (screen length, location of status line),
but not the necessary readjustment of line lengths.  That cannot
be done without reloading, because the cached rendered document
structure is specific to the line length.

It seemed to work somewhat better with slang, but that may be only
because, after reducing the line length but before a reload, the lines
that are now too long are wrapped with slang but truncated with curses.

That's all for Linux, and not actually checked in an exterm but with
text mode consoles (using "svgatextmode" to change screen size).

> Does anyone use the function
> size_change in LYUtils.h? 

The function is always used.  It's installed as the signal handler
for WINCH, and it's called directly in various places to initialize
LYlines and LYcols.

If it did not work, lynx would never adapt to the changed size.

> It seems to be be set by configure but in

configure decides whether to define HAVE_SIZECHANGE.  But not defining
it doesn't mean that the function size_change isn't used - It just means
that it doesn't do real size detection for the non-slang case.
IOW, the name HAVE_SIZECHANGE may be misleading.

> NetBSD and XFree86 (3.3.3), the resizing is funky.

(If you are seeing the same as I:) Not a problem with the function
size_change itself IMO.

   Klaus

reply via email to

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