Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: mintty 3.1.6

[Thomas Wolff <towo@towo.net>]

Am 22.05.2020 um 16:56 schrieb Takashi Yano via Cygwin:
> On Fri, 22 May 2020 22:54:05 +0900
> Takashi Yano via Cygwin <cygwin@cygwin.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 May 2020 21:58:00 +0900
>> Takashi Yano via Cygwin <cygwin@cygwin.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 May 2020 20:01:31 +0900
>>> Takashi Yano via Cygwin <cygwin@cygwin.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 22 May 2020 12:14:43 +0200
>>>> Thomas Wolff wrote:
>>>>> Hi Takashi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 22.05.2020 um 11:22 schrieb Takashi Yano via Cygwin:
>>>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 19:41:27 +0200
>>>>>> Thomas Wolff wrote:
>>>>>>> I have uploaded mintty 3.1.6 with the following changes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Window handling
>>>>>>>      * Fixed resource leak when displaying images (#995).
>>>>>>>      * Fixed crash condition on keyboard auto-repeat (#996). (Apologies
>>>>>>> for this one.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The homepage is at http://mintty.github.io/
>>>>>>> It also links to the issue tracker.
>>>>>> After v3.1.5, the key repeat rate becomes almost halfened.
>>>>>> Is this behaviour by design?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The key repeat rate is about 30 chars/sec in v3.1.4, but
>>>>>> it is 15 chars/sec in v3.1.5 and v3.1.6.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is little bit flustrating in editor cursor movement.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I've uploaded a commit: keyboard auto-repeat handling is now unaffected
>>>>> by default
>>>>> Explanation: the new auto-repeat rate limitation with a maximum of 30
>>>>> cps (following the DECARR sequence of VT520) was effectively slowing
>>>>> down keyboards; I had the impression 30 would be enough... sorry
>>>> I also think 30 cps would be enough, however, the key repeat rate
>>>> is not as setting by ESC[n-p sequence. Measured results in v3.1.6
>>>> are as follows. Actual key repeat rate does not increase linearly.
>>>>
>>>> ^[[1-p  : 1 cps
>>>> ^[[2-p  : 2 cps
>>>> ^[[3-p  : 3 cps
>>>> ^[[5-p  : 4.7cps
>>>> ^[[10-p : 8.2cps
>>>> ^[[20-p : 14.8cps
>>>> ^[[30-p : 16.3cps
>>> Revising code in wininput.c as follows resolve this problem.
>>>
>>> static LONG last_key_time = 0;
>>> static LONG last_message_time = 0;
>>>
>>>    LONG message_time = GetMessageTime();
>>>    LONG last_key_time_new = message_time;
>>>    if (repeat) {
>>> #ifdef auto_repeat_cursor_keys_option
>>>      switch (key) {
>>>        when VK_PRIOR ... VK_DOWN: do not return...;
>>>      }
>>> #endif
>>>      if (!term.auto_repeat)
>>>        return true;
>>>      if (message_time - last_message_time < 2*1000/term.repeat_rate)
>>>        /* Key repeat seems to be continued. */
>>>        last_key_time_new = last_key_time + 1000/term.repeat_rate;
>>>      last_message_time = message_time;
>>>      if (message_time - last_key_time < 1000/term.repeat_rate)
>>>        return true;
>>>    }
>>>    last_key_time = last_key_time_new;
>>>
>>> ^[[1-p   : 1 cps
>>> ^[[2-p   : 2 cps
>>> ^[[3-p   : 3 cps
>>> ^[[5-p   : 5 cps
>>> ^[[10-p  : 9.7cps
>>> ^[[20-p  : 19.4cps
>>> ^[[30-p  : 29.0cps
>> The simplified following code also work as expected.
>> Protection for division by 0 is added as well.
>>
>> static LONG last_key_time = 0;
>>
>>    LONG message_time = GetMessageTime();
>>    if (repeat) {
>> #ifdef auto_repeat_cursor_keys_option
>>      switch (key) {
>>        when VK_PRIOR ... VK_DOWN: do not return...;
>>      }
>> #endif
>>      if (!term.auto_repeat)
>>        return true;
>>      if (term.repeat_rate &&
>>          message_time - last_key_time < 1000 / term.repeat_rate)
>>        return true;
>>    }
>>    if (term.repeat_rate &&
>>        message_time - last_key_time < 2*1000 / term.repeat_rate)
>>      /* Key repeat seems to be continued. */
>>      last_key_time += 1000 / term.repeat_rate;
>>    else
>>      last_key_time = message_time;
> Sorry again and again. After all, the code above doesn't work
> as expected. I would like to propose the code below.
>
> static LONG last_key_time = 0;
>
>    LONG message_time = GetMessageTime();
>    if (repeat) {
> #ifdef auto_repeat_cursor_keys_option
>      switch (key) {
>        when VK_PRIOR ... VK_DOWN: do not return...;
>      }
> #endif
>      if (!term.auto_repeat)
>        return true;
>      if (term.repeat_rate &&
>          message_time - last_key_time < 1000 / term.repeat_rate)
>        return true;
>    }
>    if (term.repeat_rate && repeat &&
>        message_time - last_key_time < 2*1000 / term.repeat_rate)
>      /* Key repeat seems to be continued. */
>      last_key_time += 1000 / term.repeat_rate;
>    else
>      last_key_time = message_time;
Thank you, I've uploaded that version.
Thomas