Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> writes:
> > > I think the non-GUARANTEE values is wrong.
> > This may be so. However, it's exactly the value I need,
> Why do you care about lines?
I do not understand the question.
Why do you need the value as generated from the GUARANTEE=nil instead
of GUARANTEE=t ?
> > OK, but this isn't really the same problem.
Huh? It is quite obvious that lack of redisplay causes window-start
to return the wrong value. If my understanding is correct, the
GUARANTEE argument was invented *exactly* for that purpose -- to get
the correct value without forcing a redisplay.
No it is not the lack of redisplay it is the lack of scrolling. Maybe
that code is completely intertwined but it is conceptually different.
Maybe the difference doesn't matter much, because you need to do part
of the redisplay computation to know how to scroll.
That code is buried deep in redisplay. I don't think you can
"force it to be run" without also triggering redisplay. Or, do you
mean that the redisplay code should be run, while the redisplay
*output* should be suppressed?
That may be necessary and then indeed it would do effectively the
same as the window-end GUARANTEE code.
I am not denying that window-start doesn't need fixing. I am just
trying to explain why there is currently a difference between the two.