> On Aug 28, 2015, at 7:23 AM, Sous Lesquels <a9f5...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I feel that with increasing monitors sizes == increasing window sizes,
You’re making an unwarranted assumption. Increasing monitor sizes do not require increasing window widths. As we saw in my original testing, the problem does not occur when the terminal window is 80 columns wide. In fact, the default 80 column width is a bit too wide for optimal reading comprehension already: http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2014/09/balancing-line-length-font-size-responsive-web-design/ I’m not alone in recognizing this fact, and therefore choosing to use extra monitor space to increase the *height* of terminal windows only. I generally keep windows taller than wide, arranged in 2-3 columns across on my 27” monitors. The lone article I linked above is just a gloss over some very old, well-established science. It’s why books are the size they are, and why newspapers print their material in multiple columns instead of spanning the whole page width. I strongly encourage you to reconsider your practice of full-screening console windows. ConEmu crashes aside, you are harming your own productivity. (The same goes for any window containing primarily text: the message pane in your email client, your web browser, your desktop Kindle app…) For Science, I decided to try and narrow the range where the symptom occurs. I could not make it happen at 160 columns after three runs. I failed again at 240. Then I increased it to 300, and still failed: three runs, no calloc() abort. This whole time, I had the window at 64 lines high, so I tried increasing that to near my monitor’s height, 84 lines with the font settings I prefer. Still no replication of the symptom. By this point, I had only about 3-4 mm of space around the window top-and-bottom, and about 1 cm to either side, so I finally full-screened the window, and *now* the symptom reoccured. So Doctor Repin is right: don’t do that. :) > I can change > from ConEmu to mintty, but IMHO that's like saying I can use the > stairs instead of an elevator in Burj Khalifa. A more apt comparison is between stairs and ramps in a world where most people use wheels to get around, but you prefer the stairs. You’ve discovered that the dust on the stairs occasionally catches fire when you run up them with a Roman candle in each hand. So you complain that your leg hair is getting scorched, and are rejecting advice to either use the well-swept ramp or stop carrying flaming objects up the stairs. Defaults matter. The ramp is front-and-center when you walk in the main Cygwin doors, whereas the stairs are down a poorly-lit side hall, one turn to the left and two to the right, past the soda machine, and behind an unmarked door. Your path will not be as well-traveled, and consequently will not be as well-maintained. > Saying "it's ms bug", "it's a design choice", "it's a bug, but we > don't have time / resources to fix it", "it happens so rarely, we > don't care", "it's going to be fixed in 2030", etc. is fine with me. How about, “Scratch your own itch.” You have the source code and a replicable test case. *I* have the source and a replicable test case, too, but I don’t have the itch. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
