On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote:
> If you were adding it to company-css, wouldn't you just add it to 
> company-css-value-classes? And then refer to it in background-image 
> value inside company-css-property-alist?
> 
> What the limitation of that approach? Do value classes in the spec 
> refer back to the actual properties sometimes?

Yes, though on closer inspection, I see that it only happens in one case
so far (the value class `bg-layer' referring to the property
`background-color').

But more importantly, in the example above, the `image' value class
refers to four other value classes, one of which has further references.
This case is not handled by the current company-css, since it only
recurses on values from the property alist.

This is the main difference between `company-css-property-values' and
`css--property-values': the former doesn't support referencing from the
value class alist.

(Indeed, there seems to be a bug in `company-css-value-classes' where
`align-stretch' tries to refer to `align-common', but that won't work.)

> I'm not sure I follow. Expanding it in company-css-property-alist?

I meant that if we wanted to keep the value class alist flat, i.e. don't
put references in it, we could replace every entry with the result of
`(company-css-property-values "value-class-name")'.

-- Simen