[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#13686: hi-yellow vs. hi-lock-1
From: |
Jambunathan K |
Subject: |
bug#13686: hi-yellow vs. hi-lock-1 |
Date: |
Thu, 07 Mar 2013 01:36:50 +0530 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
David Koppelman <koppel@ece.lsu.edu> writes:
>> From: Jambunathan K <kjambunathan <at> gmail.com>
>>
>> Let's focus on core, themable faces. How many you want in what prefix
>> or file. I propose that these faces be named opaquely as
>
>> hi-lock-N
>> highlight-N
>> font-lock-user-N
>> font-lock-highlight-N
>> font-lock-extra-face-N
>
> I object to using cryptic names for faces.
Ok, I withdraw hi-lock-N. As for other faces, I believe it is Stefan's
or Emacs maintainers call. I am moving forward, after getting a
in-principle go from Stefan.
> The user should see a recognizable color name for the default hi-lock
> faces, and should be able to pick any face he or she likes. Hi-lock
> currently does this. I know that this can be achieved using face names
> such as hi-lock-1 by extracting a color from a face definition (if
> necessary, mapping an RGB triple to a name), but this is an
> unnecessary complication. As I see it, the only things that will be
> achieved are providing for themability and abiding by a convention
> that some interpret as a separation of face attributes from face
> names.
I gave a code snippet at the end of the mail. If you had looked at it,
you will realize that I have done nothing which changes the status quo
but I have done eveything to accommodate my requirements. I am the
proposer, right?
Please provide specific feedback on the snippet rather than registering
a broad objection. I have made an effort to understand the
"I-want-color" camp and I have also openly acknowledged that the
"I-want-color" camp have valid and sensible arguments.
Jambunathan K.
bug#13686: hi-yellow vs. hi-lock-1, Jambunathan K, 2013/03/06