Hi,

>> OK, I use a couple of themes that happen to have a shadowy background for the fringe, but I could live with
>> anything that makes this _conceptual_ difference visible.

> I don't think I agree with this concept. For example, the stuff
> usually written into the display margins is also separate from the
> buffer text, but we still use the same 'default' face there.

Wouldn't it be nice if Emacs made this conceptual difference clear by default. We can start with the line numbers and then continue with other stuff. I have started this because I got a couple PRs accepted by some theme editors who valued the concept, not just the visuals of it.

BTW, no bad feelings here, but what is the real reason behind changing the modeline face to variable pitch? I have tested master recently and the feeling was really strange.

(at least) I would like a conceptually sound Emacs and highlighting buffer vs. 'the rest' looks like a basic principle to me.

But again, why not giving it a try as we have with the (IMvvHO weird) font for the modeline and bow to reactions of the community?

Best, /PA

On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 14:19, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> From: Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <paaguti@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2021 07:45:57 +0100
> Cc: Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>, Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>, 51605@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> point taken... if it isn't the fringe, then something else. I find it more problematic to have the same face for the
> buffer and line numbers.
> And it's from the conceptual point of view that line numbers aren't buffer and therefore should have a different
> face by default.
>
> OK, I use a couple of themes that happen to have a shadowy background for the fringe, but I could live with
> anything that makes this _conceptual_ difference visible.

I don't think I agree with this concept. For example, the stuff
usually written into the display margins is also separate from the
buffer text, but we still use the same 'default' face there.

> (Just my .2c worth of experience; when I edit/correct Python exercises from my students, this visual
> difference helps me detecting indentation errors much quicker; my student's experience: different line number
> and buffer faces help them editing and therefore adopting Emacs as their editor of choice for Python and from
> there they explore org-mode for their short papers and presentations and they become regular users in no
> time ;-) )

No one argues that some situations and some personal preferences call
for a distinct face for the line numbers. That's why we use a special
face there, not the default face. That's not what the argument is
about. It is about changing the defaults, and that must have reasons
much more serious than just anecdotal evidence about this or that use
case.