view etc/LPF @ 53879:e3771c262410

New file. Move original fringe related declarations and code from dispextern.h and xdisp.c here. Rework code to support user defined fringe bitmaps, redefining standard bitmaps, ability to overlay user defined bitmap with overlay arrow bitmap, and add faces to bitmaps. (Voverflow_newline_into_fringe): Declare here. (enum fringe_bitmap_align): New enum. (..._bits): All bitmaps are now defined without bitswapping; that is now done in init_fringe_once (if necessary). (standard_bitmaps): New array with specifications for the standard fringe bitmaps. (fringe_faces): New array. (valid_fringe_bitmap_id_p): New function. (draw_fringe_bitmap_1): Rename from draw_fringe_bitmap. (draw_fringe_bitmap): New function which draws fringe bitmap, possibly overlaying bitmap with cursor in right fringe or the overlay arrow in the left fringe. (update_window_fringes): Do not handle overlay arrow here. Compare and copy fringe bitmap faces. (init_fringe_bitmap): New function. (Fdefine_fringe_bitmap, Fdestroy_fringe_bitmap): New DEFUNs to define and destroy user defined fringe bitmaps. (Fset_fringe_bitmap_face): New DEFUN to set face for a fringe bitmap. (Ffringe_bitmaps_at_pos): New DEFUN to read current fringe bitmaps. (syms_of_fringe): New function. Defsubr new DEFUNs. DEFVAR_LISP Voverflow_newline_into_fringe. (init_fringe_once, init_fringe): New functions. (w32_init_fringe, w32_reset_fringes) [WINDOWS_NT]: New functions.

	   Protect Your Freedom to Write Programs
	   Join the League for Programming Freedom
	       (Version of February 3, 1994)

Ten years ago, programmers were allowed to write programs using all
the techniques they knew, and providing whatever features they felt
were useful.  This is no longer the case.  New monopolies, known as
software patents and interface copyrights, have taken away our freedom
of expression and our ability to do a good job.

"Look and feel" lawsuits attempt to monopolize well-known command
languages; some have succeeded.  Copyrights on command languages
enforce gratuitous incompatibility, close opportunities for
competition, and stifle incremental improvements.

Software patents are even more dangerous; they make every design
decision in the development of a program carry a risk of a lawsuit,
with draconian pretrial seizure.  It is difficult and expensive to
find out whether the techniques you consider using are patented; it is
impossible to find out whether they will be patented in the future.

The League for Programming Freedom is a grass-roots organization of
professors, students, businessmen, programmers and users dedicated to
bringing back the freedom to write programs.  The League is not
opposed to the legal system that Congress expressly established for
software--copyright on individual programs.  Our aim is to reverse the
recent changes that prevent programmers from doing their work.

The League works to abolish the new monopolies by publishing articles,
talking with public officials, denouncing egregious offenders, and
filing amicus curiae briefs, most notably against Lotus in its suit
against Borland.  We testified twice at the recent Patent Office
hearings on software patents.  We welcome suggestions for other
activities, as well as help in carrying them out.


(Added 2003) The League for Programming Freedom is inactive nowadays,
though its web site www.programming-freedom.org is still maintained.
It would be very useful to find a person who could take the initiative
to get the LPF operating again.  It will be a substantial job,
requiring persistence and working with a lawyer.  If you want to do
it, please write to [e-mail].