[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] About the :distant-foreground face attribute

From: Daniel Colascione
Subject: Re: [PATCH] About the :distant-foreground face attribute
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:15:06 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0

On 01/15/2014 01:12 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:03:29 -0800
From: Daniel Colascione <address@hidden>
CC: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,

It has been a long tradition of Emacs not to generalize before there's
a clear and present need to.

Sure. The problem with :adjust-colors or some other specific name,
though, is what happens to ordering if we introduce other kinds of
filters. If we have :adjust-colors and some hypothetical :adjust-foo,
the order in which the adjustments are made becomes unclear.

Again, why should we be bothered by hypothetical attributes?  Let's
bother about them when they become a reality, or at least come close.

We're not bothering with them now. We're making sure we won't *be* bothered by them later.

Also, can we please include "post-" in the name of the attribute? I want
to emphasize that the filtering happens *after* face merging.

Is it wise to expose implementation details in the interfaces?

Generally no, but I don't see how you can avoid it. Whether the filtering happens after face composition or face-by-face during attribute merging affects the values the filter function sees. It's part of the interface.

reply via email to

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