[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Custom themes

From: Luc Teirlinck
Subject: Re: Custom themes
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:28:25 -0500 (CDT)

Richard Stallman wrote:

   That sounds like a good approach.  I see a few approaches that
   could make sense:

   1. Most recent takes priority.
   2. Let user specify the priority order.
   3. Don't allow loading themes that conflict.
   4. Ask the user what to do, each time there is a conflict.

It would appear that "unrequiring" of individual themes does not
currently work after all, as I already pointed out.  In that case,
just allowing to require or load implements (1): Most recent wins.

   I do not understand "unconditional loading".  Could you explain
   what you mean by that?

`require-theme' checks whether the theme already has been loaded, by
checking whether it is a member of `features'.  In other words, it
works just like a regular require.  If it is already in features,
`require-theme' does nothing.  By "unconditional loading", I mean
just loading the file without checking anything.  My latest patches
just mention both possibilities and let the user decide.

I believe that a really natural and intuitive implementation of
unrequiring individual themes (in fact just implementing _any_
unrequiring of individual themes) requires a lot more work.  The
current Custom Themes code does not appear to come close to succeeding
in implementing _any_ form of individual unrequiring.  My original
impression that it did was erroneous.  I doubt that the current Custom
themes code even can be used as a _basis_ for that.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]