[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
FW: Eliminating a couple of independent face definitions
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
FW: Eliminating a couple of independent face definitions |
Date: |
Wed, 2 Feb 2011 13:03:12 -0800 |
> The counterargument is that the majority of faces out there already do
> inherit from font-lock and other basic faces.
For some definition of "out there", perhaps. Perhaps not.
The majority of faces should _not_ inherit from such faces, IMO.
Inheritance should be based on similarity (preferably set inclusion) of use
(usage, use case, purpose), not just on similarity of face attributes.
A new face should not inherit from face `region' just because its default
attributes are the same as the default attributes of face `region', for example.
Re: Eliminating a couple of independent face definitions, Chong Yidong, 2011/02/02
Re: Eliminating a couple of independent face definitions, Julien Danjou, 2011/02/02
Re: Eliminating a couple of independent face definitions, Štěpán Němec, 2011/02/02
FW: Eliminating a couple of independent face definitions,
Drew Adams <=