[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (type graphic)
Re: (type graphic)
Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:28:08 +0200 (IST)
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Miles Bader wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> > Miles, could you please tell what does defface need to know about the
> > display capabilities for the above distinction? Is it a number of
> > supported colors, perhaps? If so, we can make a better test, I think.
> I just wanted an inverse of (type tty), because sometimes it's more
> convenient to write face descriptions that way -- note the proliferation
> of (type x w32 mac), except that often w32 or mac are left out, for no
> apparent good reason.
The "(type x w32 mac)" are there primarily for hysterical reasons: they
started as "(type x)", then the other types were added as time passed by.
They were left alone by default, not by some action.
However, if we want to change this, we might as well do it right ;-)
The Right Way (IMHO) is to realize why do we need separate face
definitions. After all, given the transparent mapping of X colors to tty
colors, a single defface should work for all platforms, right? It even
actually works that way for several faces defined by some packages, such
The only reason that I could think of that a different definition is
required on character terminals is that they have much less colors, and
so colors such as gray65, gray75, and gray85 all map to the same color.
(This is a real-life example: look at diff-mode.el.)
If the number of supported colors is the _only_ reason, we can simply
test how many colors are supported, and act accordingly, or define a
new type, say '256color, to check inside defface instead 'tty. The
advantage of this is that it will DTRT even if some character terminal
supports lots of colors (I'm told that the w32 terminal can, in
principle, do that, even if the current code doesn't yet support that).
If there are other reasons for the distinction between display types
inside defface, let's hear them.
> * Actually (display-graphic-p FRAME) is basically equivalent to
> "(member window-system '(x w32 mac))" in this case, which I guess
> means that `pc' will be considered a tty. This seems correct to me,
> but you certainly know better....
Yes, it is correct to group pc with tty by defult. That's not the reason
for my comments.
- (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/25
- Re: (type graphic), Miles Bader, 2000/10/25
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/26
- Re: (type graphic), Miles Bader, 2000/10/26
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/27
- Re: (type graphic), Miles Bader, 2000/10/27
- Re: (type graphic), Gerd Moellmann, 2000/10/26