Re: Bug?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>
> Cc: Shynur Xie <one.last.kiss@outlook.com>,  Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
>  "emacs-devel@gnu.org" <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> Date: Sun, 07 May 2023 20:05:33 +0800
> 
> Mattias Engdegård <mattiase@acm.org> writes:
> 
> > 6 maj 2023 kl. 16.58 skrev Shynur Xie <one.last.kiss@outlook.com>:
> >
> >> But did you notice that all the faces defined in
> >> <lisp/faces.el> use "pre-defined color names" instead of "#RRGGBB"?
> >> I'm a little worried that if we use "#RRGGBB", it might be not
> >> intuitive and not fit with the overall style of <lisp/faces.el>.
> >
> > I have no opinion on the matter. I suppose `darkskyblue4` is the
> > closest. Which colour would you prefer?
> 
> Please try very hard to avoid using device or intensity specifications
> for colors.  This is because many vendors of X servers perform color
> calibration for graphics devices by editing the list of pre-defined X
> colors.
> 
> In addition, using non-predefined colors means that you will be more
> likely to allocate a color cell in the default colormap which no other
> program can use.  While not as important as it used to be, excessive
> color use is still something to keep in mind when writing programs.

Personally, I fail to understand why we are considering changes in
default faces for this minor issue.  We have enough faces from which
to inherit, faces whose definitions endured many years of use and
scrutiny.  Let's not over-engineer, OK?