[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: face-alias issues
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: face-alias issues |
Date: |
Sat, 25 Jun 2005 08:58:17 +0900 |
On 6/25/05, Luc Teirlinck <address@hidden> wrote:
> If the result is solid enough, maybe it would be safe to rename the
> `font-lock-...-face' faces as well. [I didn't do so before because
> they are far more widely used than other faces.]
>
> I believe that the idea here is that they are variables and faces with
> the same name. So I believe that the font-lock stuff is probably
> better left alone.
"The idea is"? Is that supposed to be justification? [I could as
easily write "the idea is to have names that end with
"-fuullluu-oiusdf".]
The current names cause a fair amount of confusion, as authors rarely
seem clear on the difference, and tend to sort of randomly mix face
names and face variables in font-lock specs.
It would be better to make the difference clear, and merely
documenting is probably not going to be so effective unless there's a
tangible difference.
The only reason I can see for retaining the old names is if
backward-compatibility isn't solid enough -- and then it's better to
try first to make compatibility better.
-Miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
- Re: face-alias issues, (continued)
- Re: face-alias issues, Miles Bader, 2005/06/22
- Re: face-alias issues, Miles Bader, 2005/06/22
- Re: face-alias issues, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/22
- Re: face-alias issues, Miles Bader, 2005/06/22
- Re: face-alias issues, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/22
- Re: face-alias issues, Kim F. Storm, 2005/06/23
- Re: face-alias issues, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/23
- Re: face-alias issues, Miles Bader, 2005/06/24
- Re: face-alias issues, Miles Bader, 2005/06/24
- Re: face-alias issues, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/24
- Re: face-alias issues,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: face-alias issues, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/24
- Re: face-alias issues, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/23