<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: mutt/2019: menu_context itches (Re: your mail)



On Wednesday, 10 August 2005 at 13:08, TAKAHASHI Tamotsu wrote:
> * Tue Aug  9 2005 Brendan Cully <brendan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > I think $menu_context makes sense and is a nice parallel to
> > $pager_context. Why were we renaming this one again?
> 
> We found it not so parallel.
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mutt-dev&m=111220557314589&w=2
> But I'm not against keeping $menu_context.
> 
> 
> > So I'd propose:
> > keep $menu_context
> > and in place of $menu_move: $menu_fill_screen? or just $fill_menu?
> > (with the sense inverted, obviously). I actually prefer the latter. Or
> > maybe $menu_fill to make Rado happy.
> 
> $menu_fill sounds good.
> 
> So, the conclusion is...?
> $menu_context -> $menu_context
> (not in 1.5.9)-> $menu_overlap
> $menu_move_off-> $menu_fill

Ok, I reread the entire old thread, and now I see what you mean about
$menu_context not being parallel to $pager_context. I apologize for
not having reread it before opening my mouth the last time. Thus, a
new set of name suggestions. Let the flaming begin anew.

. (not in 1.5.9) -> $menu_context
  (but can we omit this addition for now? I haven't had time to get over
  the feeling that this is bloat...)
. $menu_context -> $menu_scroll_context ?
  $indicator_margin (or the more verbose $menu_indicator_margin) might
  also be ok, but context has an established meaning. This variable
  should only affect scrolling operations (vs jumping ones), right?
. $menu_move_off -> $menu_fill.

Hopefully these will polarize people, since there didn't seem to be a
clear consensus previously.

I'll go test your bugfix patch now...

Attachment: pgp5gQEgT10DY.pgp
Description: PGP signature