starred/terminal
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/terminal.git synced 2026-02-04 05:35:20 +00:00
Code Issues 19.0k Packages Projects Releases 20 Wiki Activity

[PR #1807] [MERGED] Fix margin boundary tests in the RI, DL, and IL escape sequences. #24666

New Issue
Open
opened 2026-01-31 09:04:40 +00:00 by claunia · 0 comments
claunia commented 2026-01-31 09:04:40 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

📋 Pull Request Information

Original PR: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/pull/1807
Author: @j4james
Created: 7/3/2019
Status: ✅ Merged
Merged: 7/10/2019
Merged by: @miniksa

Base: master ← Head: fix-margin-scrolling

📝 Commits (3)

  • 56a1dbf Fix margin boundary tests in the RI, DL, and IL sequences.
  • f2ae9c9 Refactor the margin boundary tests into a reusable SCREEN_INFORMATION method.
  • 8b9acbf Add screen buffer unit tests for the RI, DL, and IL sequences.

📊 Changes

4 files changed (+252 additions, -11 deletions)

View changed files

📝 src/host/getset.cpp (+4 -11)
📝 src/host/screenInfo.cpp (+18 -0)
📝 src/host/screenInfo.hpp (+1 -0)
📝 src/host/ut_host/ScreenBufferTests.cpp (+229 -0)

📄 Description

Summary of the Pull Request

When executing an escape sequence that might cause the viewport to scroll, a check is made to see whether the cursor position is in the bounds of the scroll margins, otherwise the scroll operation shouldn't happen. In a couple of cases (in the RI, DL, and IL escape sequence), these boundary tests were incorrect, so the scroll operation would sometimes not occur when it should have. This PR fixes those boundary tests.

Tested manually, and with the joe editor which was previously failing, and with some additional screen buffer unit tests.

PR Checklist

  • Closes Bug Report: Reaction to Keyboard input is anomalous (#1366)
  • CLA signed. If not, go over here and sign the CLA
  • Tests added/passed
  • Requires documentation to be updated
  • I've discussed this with core contributors already. If not checked, I'm ready to accept this work might be rejected in favor of a different grand plan. Issue number where discussion took place: #1366

Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments

The one problem was the use of Viewport::IsInBounds method to check whether the cursor was inside the margins. That method only works on the first column of the screen, because the horizontal margins are always set to 0. So that needed to be replaced with a test that only checked the y offset against the vertical margins.

The other problem was not first checking whether the margins had actually been set. When the margins aren't set, the top and bottom boundaries are both 0, so that needs to be handled as a special case, otherwise it'll only match positions on the first line of the screen.

Having made these fixes in the DoSrvPrivateReverseLineFeed and DoSrvPrivateModifyLinesImpl methods, I thought it might also be a good idea to refactor the boundary tests into a shared method in the SCREEN_INFORMATION class, to try and make the code more readable. I could also then make use of that method to simplify the DoSrvMoveCursorVertically implementation a little.

I had initially planned to refactor the AdjustCursorPosition method as well, but I decided against that in the end, because the code is a lot more complicated in that case, and I didn't want to risk potential performance issues given the frequency of its use.

In any event, I've committed the refactoring as a separate step, so I can always revert that if you don't think it's a good idea.

Validation Steps Performed

I've added a few screen buffer units tests that make sure the RI, DL, and IL escape sequences basically work, and also specifically check the conditions that were previously failing.

I've also run a few of my own manual tests which check various margin boundary conditions. And I've made sure that the problem with joe editor that was reported in issue #1366 is now working.

🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.

## 📋 Pull Request Information **Original PR:** https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/pull/1807 **Author:** [@j4james](https://github.com/j4james) **Created:** 7/3/2019 **Status:** ✅ Merged **Merged:** 7/10/2019 **Merged by:** [@miniksa](https://github.com/miniksa) **Base:** `master` ← **Head:** `fix-margin-scrolling` --- ### 📝 Commits (3) - [`56a1dbf`](https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/commit/56a1dbf702b55ed679642806e7d8181f5700d815) Fix margin boundary tests in the RI, DL, and IL sequences. - [`f2ae9c9`](https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/commit/f2ae9c9a9179c083bb0ddf06fdb82958ddfefc4f) Refactor the margin boundary tests into a reusable SCREEN_INFORMATION method. - [`8b9acbf`](https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/commit/8b9acbfe840db27d0dc2ee7088f6f30db080d527) Add screen buffer unit tests for the RI, DL, and IL sequences. ### 📊 Changes **4 files changed** (+252 additions, -11 deletions) <details> <summary>View changed files</summary> 📝 `src/host/getset.cpp` (+4 -11) 📝 `src/host/screenInfo.cpp` (+18 -0) 📝 `src/host/screenInfo.hpp` (+1 -0) 📝 `src/host/ut_host/ScreenBufferTests.cpp` (+229 -0) </details> ### 📄 Description <!-- Enter a brief description/summary of your PR here. What does it fix/what does it change/how was it tested (even manually, if necessary)? --> ## Summary of the Pull Request When executing an escape sequence that might cause the viewport to scroll, a check is made to see whether the cursor position is in the bounds of the scroll margins, otherwise the scroll operation shouldn't happen. In a couple of cases (in the RI, DL, and IL escape sequence), these boundary tests were incorrect, so the scroll operation would sometimes not occur when it should have. This PR fixes those boundary tests. Tested manually, and with the _joe_ editor which was previously failing, and with some additional screen buffer unit tests. <!-- Please review the items on the PR checklist before submitting--> ## PR Checklist * [x] Closes #1366 * [x] CLA signed. If not, go over [here](https://cla.opensource.microsoft.com/microsoft/Terminal) and sign the CLA * [x] Tests added/passed * [ ] Requires documentation to be updated * [x] I've discussed this with core contributors already. If not checked, I'm ready to accept this work might be rejected in favor of a different grand plan. Issue number where discussion took place: #1366 <!-- Provide a more detailed description of the PR, other things fixed or any additional comments/features here --> ## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments The one problem was the use of `Viewport::IsInBounds` method to check whether the cursor was inside the margins. That method only works on the first column of the screen, because the horizontal margins are always set to 0. So that needed to be replaced with a test that only checked the y offset against the vertical margins. The other problem was not first checking whether the margins had actually been set. When the margins aren't set, the top and bottom boundaries are both 0, so that needs to be handled as a special case, otherwise it'll only match positions on the first line of the screen. Having made these fixes in the `DoSrvPrivateReverseLineFeed` and `DoSrvPrivateModifyLinesImpl` methods, I thought it might also be a good idea to refactor the boundary tests into a shared method in the `SCREEN_INFORMATION` class, to try and make the code more readable. I could also then make use of that method to simplify the `DoSrvMoveCursorVertically` implementation a little. I had initially planned to refactor the `AdjustCursorPosition` method as well, but I decided against that in the end, because the code is a lot more complicated in that case, and I didn't want to risk potential performance issues given the frequency of its use. In any event, I've committed the refactoring as a separate step, so I can always revert that if you don't think it's a good idea. <!-- Describe how you validated the behavior. Add automated tests wherever possible, but list manual validation steps taken as well --> ## Validation Steps Performed I've added a few screen buffer units tests that make sure the RI, DL, and IL escape sequences basically work, and also specifically check the conditions that were previously failing. I've also run a few of my own manual tests which check various margin boundary conditions. And I've made sure that the problem with _joe_ editor that was reported in issue #1366 is now working. --- <sub>🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.</sub>
claunia added the pull-request label 2026-01-31 09:04:40 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
⛺ Reserved
A11yCO
A11yMAS
A11ySev1
A11ySev2
A11ySev3
A11yTTValidated
A11yUsable
A11yVoiceAccess
A11yWCAG
Area-Accessibility
Area-AtlasEngine
Area-AzureShell
Area-Build
Area-Build
Area-Chat
Area-CmdPal
Area-CodeHealth
Area-Commandline
Area-CookedRead
Area-DefApp
Area-Extensibility
Area-Fonts
Area-GroupPolicy
Area-i18n
Area-Input
Area-Interaction
Area-Interop
Area-Localization
Area-Output
Area-Performance
Area-Portable
Area-Quality
Area-Remoting
Area-Rendering
Area-Schema
Area-Server
Area-Settings
Area-SettingsUI
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-Suggestions
Area-Suggestions
Area-TerminalConnection
Area-TerminalControl
Area-Theming
Area-UserInterface
Area-VT
Area-Windowing
Area-WPFControl
AutoMerge
Blocking-Ingestion
Culprit-Centennial
Culprit-WinUI
Disability-All
Disability-Blind
Disability-LowVision
Disability-Mobility
External-Blocked-WinUI3
Fixed
Gathering-Data
good first issue
HCL-E+D
HCL-WindowsTerminal
Help Wanted
Impact-Compatibility
Impact-Compliance
Impact-Correctness
Impact-Visual
In-PR
InclusionBacklog
InclusionBacklog-Windows TerminalWin32
InclusionCommitted-202206
Issue-Bug
Issue-Docs
Issue-Feature
Issue-Feature
Issue-Question
Issue-Samples
Issue-Scenario
Issue-Task
Needs-Attention
Needs-Author-Feedback
Needs-Bisect
Needs-Discussion
Needs-Repro
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Triage
No-Recent-Activity
Priority-0
Priority-1
Priority-2
Priority-3
Product-Cmd.exe
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Conhost
Product-Conpty
Product-Meta
Product-Powershell
Product-Terminal
Product-WSL
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Resolution-Answered
Resolution-By-Design
Resolution-Duplicate
Resolution-External
Resolution-Fix-Available
Resolution-Fix-Committed
Resolution-No-Repro
Resolution-Won't-Fix
Severity-Blocking
Severity-Crash
Severity-DataLoss
spam
this-will-be-a-breaking-change
Tracking-External
WindowsTerminal_Win32
Work-Item
zAskModeBug
zInbox-Bug
No Label pull-request
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/terminal#24666
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?