[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: BIKESHED: completion faces

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: BIKESHED: completion faces
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 11:45:35 +0200

> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
> From: Dmitry Gutov <address@hidden>
> Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2019 11:18:46 +0200
> On 09.11.2019 17:31, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > I think you are looking at this from the implementation POV.  From
> > users' POV, an option (or a minor mode) is a better way when we are
> > talking not just about changing colors and other face attributes, but
> > about changing behavior in significant ways.  In this case, what is
> > implemented via faces changes the behavior, because a face prominently
> > different from the default becomes like the default, and another face
> > makes the reverse transformation.  Think of this as a binary mode that
> > makes either the first-difference or the common part prominent:
> > flipping a variable is an easily understood and easily discovered way
> > of getting each user the behavior he/she wants.
> How would that work? Having two faces have different default definitions 
> depending on the value of the variable?

Either that or a function that redefines the face definitions, e.g. by
aliasing/copying from other faces.

> Any custom face would override that decision. And chasing all theme 
> authors to make them honor the variable is a lot of effort.

I'm not sure I understand what customization scenarios you have in
mind, so I don't think I see the problem.

reply via email to

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