From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#59347: 29.0.50; `:family` face setting ignored Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 10:16:48 +0200 Message-ID: <83sfhq2tu7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83tu2t4ie9.fsf@gnu.org> <7cc9e03786e324ff82ef@heytings.org> <83bkp04gjl.fsf@gnu.org> <83leo42vm9.fsf@gnu.org> <0d1ea3007fd94b7ae0b1@heytings.org> <83r0xv1649.fsf@gnu.org> <0d1ea3007f532a493429@heytings.org> <83cz9f12bh.fsf@gnu.org> <835yewleyn.fsf@gnu.org> <83tu2b9rlx.fsf@gnu.org> <83k0347gtu.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1952"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 59347@debbugs.gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 08 09:18:18 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C6j-0000Iz-Gp for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:18:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C6Y-0001ZU-N9; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:18:06 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C6U-0001Z9-TR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:18:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C6U-0000fb-Ih for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:18:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C6U-0005ZE-12 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:18:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 08:18:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 59347 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 59347-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B59347.167048743121389 (code B ref 59347); Thu, 08 Dec 2022 08:18:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 59347) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Dec 2022 08:17:11 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55193 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C5f-0005Yu-AW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:17:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41116) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C5a-0005YS-8e for 59347@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:17:09 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C5U-0007wG-A3; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:17:00 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=yePbV4ps9xdZ5v075dS0GbVXxyVeJ2Gu2/qyEIzVhhk=; b=fAEOaNVVz5SR XctnqGskwsSGQW49OL2aYH+bnFffshafiG2QnJ6pY2tLRvYpPLmBwyXC0/6rON1DjfKsp5fIA8caU 7TGatW09fefPSuiX1uXma++2tHka4cIv/cDT9xUvddK02ZipgkgrbNc3r+++W/Woasti6O8YdC73X vPQSbOmLFDDGn8gV9XC6wVmOJ+Ni7LkM8zz12fNUZOTWgecXgGKZtCJBy54dXv7Q8X4nlyqbuCS2u pEm2aalhNhWGBaLwQ+AB6PbtHgLnkfGrpzfvhTYYMOeO7gEbZGS62KS4YDemww202BlkDXogJD2tx oClE02NQyRq4dgKasO7c0g==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3C5R-00020E-Q4; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 03:16:59 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Gregory Heytings on Thu, 08 Dec 2022 01:07:25 +0000) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:250250 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 01:07:25 +0000 > From: Gregory Heytings > cc: Eli Zaretskii , 59347@debbugs.gnu.org > > Do you mean that if a user chooses a font for the default face that has a > single variant (say 'regular'), then the 'bold' face (which does not > specify any family) should be realized with another font which has a bold > variant? And that the 'italic' face should likewise be realized with > another font which has an italic variant? I don't think these situations are possible, at least not all of them, because Emacs will not use a font for the default face if that font doesn't have at least the bold or italic variant. > FWIW, I don't think either of these options are reasonable. You keep saying that, but you don't explain why this must be the truth. A user or a Lisp program can reasonably want an ultra-bold font and consider that more important than keeping the family. You never explained why you thought this to be an unreasonable request. > IMO in the first case the user should just use a font which has more > variants for the default face (there are plenty of excellent fonts), > and in the second case it is fine to approximate the weight with the > weights that are available in the default font. The questions is what should Emacs do in this case, not what the user should do. When I want Emacs to render text in some script, I would naturally prefer _any_ font that is capable of supporting that script, even if it doesn't belong to the family from which the default font is taken. Why should width or slant or weight be treated differently?