[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Starnge comment in Custom Theme code.

From: Richard M. Stallman
Subject: Re: Starnge comment in Custom Theme code.
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 21:20:24 -0500

    I referred to the following, which Richard wrote when we discussed
    Custom Themes many months ago:

        As for settings with setq, those should make the variable a rogue, as
        now.  When the variable is a rogue, theme operations should not touch

Yes, I did say that in a message.  However, what I subsequently
implemented seems more flexible than that, because it allows themes to
set these variables.

If there are some bugs in custom theme handling of them, I'd rather
fix the bugs than make custom themes not work on them.

    But what _really_ matters is that we decided a few days ago to
    consider Custom Themes (except for the user theme) as alternative
    "standard" values.

What Yidong did (and I think it was right) is call them "themed"
values.  Themed values and standard values are equivalent _in regard
to user Custom settings_, but that's only because both theme values
and default values both come "after" user Custom settings.  It does
not mean they are equivalent in other ways.

I am not sure what is the right way to deal with theme settings of
variables that have been setq's outside Custom, but the argument you
made this time does not seem persuasive.

reply via email to

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