|Subject:||Re: bat-mode: Inconsistent fontification. Consider using font-lock-function-name-face|
|Date:||Wed, 18 Sep 2019 21:21:08 +0200|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.0|
Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:The moment new faces are added I expect users to start complaining that these faces are not supported by this and that foo-mode. So mode authors aren't forced to implement them only in theory, IMO.For modes in elpa, there is also the backward compatibility problem. So they cannot feel forced to apply such new faces directly. Asking for similar faces for similar syntactic entities in different modes is legitimate. IMHO. These new faces give mode authors a hint how to provide own customized faces as long as necessary. And moving to the new faces will happen over the years only. Best regards, Michael.
Thanks everyone for your feedback. I've been quite busy the last few weeks, so sorry my lack of response.
So to sum up the responses I've gotten so far:
- personally would appreciate more default font-lock faces to
better differentiate between things which are semanticly
- don't personally have a need for additional default font-lock faces, but don't see anything wrong with it.
- critical of the pressure and expectations adding more default-faces would put on major-mode authors.
I'll be optimistic and consider that a slight majority in favour of moving forwards.
Based on the discussion so far, my proposal last year, not to mention the recent parallell thread started by Ergus we have at least these candidates:
- font-lock-label-face (font-lock-label-reference-face?)
- font-lock-function-name-face (font-lock-function-reference-face)
Is that a reasonable list of faces to add? Is it OK for me at
this point to create a patch for this, or should that list undergo
further discussion first?
The advice I received last time I asked about adding faces was that I would need to:
- clarify usage of these modes precisely
- add them to font-lock.el
- document this in the proper **/*.texi files
- add news of these additions to ETC/news
Does that still hold true?
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|