From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6117: 24.0.50; dired-marked-face same as dired-flagged-face Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 06:45:46 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87ljbyt7jg.fsf@jidanni.org> <871uwt38q1.fsf@mail.jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1312984027 7182 80.91.229.12 (10 Aug 2011 13:47:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:47:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 6117@debbugs.gnu.org, 'Chong Yidong' , jidanni@jidanni.org To: "'Juri Linkov'" , "'Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 10 15:47:01 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr97b-00086p-Db for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43529 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr97a-0001fe-V4 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:46:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:58737) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr97V-0001fS-0i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:46:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr97R-0003x9-2l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:46:52 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:50324) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr97Q-0003wy-V2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:46:48 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr98c-0004BZ-5o; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:48:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:48:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6117 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 6117-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6117.131298403716026 (code B ref 6117); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:48:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6117) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Aug 2011 13:47:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr97t-0004AR-01 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:47:17 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr97p-0004AD-Pz for 6117@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:47:15 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id p7ADjuAB004961 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:45:58 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p7ADjsY6009654 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:45:55 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt109.oracle.com (abhmt109.oracle.com [141.146.116.61]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p7ADjn9G013709; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 08:45:49 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.55.111) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 06:45:49 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <871uwt38q1.fsf@mail.jurta.org> Thread-Index: AcxXQpn/yKTvGClaR7KdbsPAS/9ZJQAHfEQQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109 X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090201.4E428B97.0011:SCFMA922111,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:48:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:49984 Archived-At: > >> Does anybody have a suggestion taken from the `font-lock-*' corpus? > > > > I picket a font-lock face at random. > > This is a dangerous change. It increases the likelihood of > deleting the wrong files, because its default color is not > distinctive and visible enough to help preventing the wrong > operation. Yes. Misguided. > Moreover, depending on `font-lock-variable-name-face' with the hope > that users never customize `font-lock-*' faces is a wrong assumption. > After selecting a new color for variable names, the user later > will discover an unpleasant effect that it have on other > completely unrelated faces. Yes. Misguided. > For instance, I customized `font-lock-variable-name-face' to "Blue1", > and now I have the same colors for Dired directories and files flagged > for deletion! It is simply a bad idea to inherit from a font-lock face here. And even in general, but that's another story. But you came close to it above, where you noted that "the user later will discover an unpleasant effect that it have on other completely unrelated faces". That "unpleasant effect" has nothing in particular to do with the case at hand, but is a general problem with inheriting faces willy nilly. But for the case at hand, at least, it should be clear to all that this is a bad idea. > If it's absolutely necessary to distinguish between marked and flagged > files, then they should use colors closer to traditional, e.g.: > > * for `dired-flagged' leave the old red face unchanged, > just like `compilation-error'; > > * for `dired-marked' use the same face definition as for > `compilation-warning'. Its orange color is very close > to `dired-flagged' but still distinctive. That would be OK. Same colors, but not via inheritance (else you get the same problem you indicated above). What's important is that: a. Both faces be easily noticeable. b. They be easily distinguished from each other. c. The deletion flag be most noticeable. A "warning" color such as red is good for this, as it signals potential danger. FWIW, I use these: Skyblue background for marked. Red foreground for flagged. Yellow-on-red for the `D' itself. Yellow-on-blueviolet for the `*' itself.