[Top][All Lists]

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

visual distinction for prettified symbols (was: ¬ notation for not? Ref:

From: Ted Zlatanov
Subject: visual distinction for prettified symbols (was: ¬ notation for not? Ref: Add a couple cells to lisp-prettify-symbols-alist)
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:13:52 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 07:46:56 -0700 (PDT) Drew Adams <address@hidden> wrote: 

DA> E.g., ensure that "¬" does not name a symbol that has a
DA> function or variable value.  If `¬' is already bound to some
DA> function or variable then you probably do not want to alias
DA> function `not' to it.

That's not really related to my question about customizations, and there
is no aliasing going on in any case. The user will see ¬ in both cases,
but they will be different underneath.

`prettify-symbols-unprettify-at-point' set to 'right-edge is really
helpful in this case, incidentally.

DA> Emacs allows most characters in function and variable names.
DA> Just because `prettify-symbols-alist' might have an entry for
DA> a given string, that does not mean that the user wants to
DA> clobber any existing function or variable that has that name.

It's a visual clobbering, but yeah, I know what you mean. Typically
users will not have such functions or variables, but it would be good to
distinguish them in a way that makes their ephemeral nature clear. Right
now they aren't.

The "shadow" face looks like a great candidate. Or maybe there can be a
new "prettified" face, similar to "shadow"? It should have colors and
decorations that are not used much otherwise, so "dimmed out" like the
"shadow" face might be ideal.


reply via email to

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