Re: face-alias issues

[Miles Bader]

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.