From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#59347: 29.0.50; `:family` face setting ignored Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:12:38 -0500 Message-ID: References: <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> Reply-To: Stefan Monnier Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11330"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 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 15:13:31 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 1p3HeU-0002hr-F3 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 15:13:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3HeK-0008Jv-Mn; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:13:20 -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 1p3HeD-0008JN-HY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:13:13 -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 1p3He1-0006qy-SW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:13:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3He1-0003Q2-Na for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:13:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 14:13:01 +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=B59347.167050876813135 (code B ref 59347); Thu, 08 Dec 2022 14:13:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 59347) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Dec 2022 14:12:48 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57023 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3Hdo-0003Pn-3W for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:12:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:49486) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3Hdm-0003Pf-9F for 59347@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 09:12:46 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D7FB61000FB; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 09:12:40 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4BF5F1000D5; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 09:12:39 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1670508759; bh=Udw0AIuikR/uLa5tupaDHSpLNqT5sD2GDD4AW3jsdro=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=BvB3nLcIG4Oo54YQBRkw3NPtzyV5Sy8n+d1KbPQk19JQ6WFkHQpUcUB0GZLOVkh5j YdDbiTXv3LI2WdDODB34d40ocheKzAgjd/+1+0psvnsoewtj58uKbqFb7jMbGMBdT7 ZE1mpI0oJZskM0/+qcpGtQ5s3vzcwksqEDaFK8E07yk+bYHo/iMrTrYZ9HaDBveTgw 9REVC+2xNRCAsoTQ+xr8m6SHRDaSd8c7kGBqu0JtwTjDen9PCysMqxnI7VYgkUz738 mPHyVhRRUxK2/q6nu1Lw8yrUpFGurFwCESSAQdB2o1Cea6Xz3mGoCZ0y6sy16/4vV/ 4ZDZdq2IN9MUg== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.193.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2412D122626; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 09:12:39 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Gregory Heytings's message of "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:250289 Archived-At: > 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? Yes. > And that the 'italic' face should likewise be realized with > another font which has an italic variant? Exactly. > FWIW, I don't think either of these options are reasonable. I can see reasons why some users would consider it not just reasonable but "The Right Thing" in their specific situation. The argument would be as simple as "Which part of `bold` don't you understand?" and would fundamentally be just the same as the argument that we should not use a monospace font when the "sans-serif" family is specified. > Why not. But it is already possible to fine-tune each individual face with > the existing mechanisms, so I'm not sure the added complexity is worth > the price. I'm not sure either, but I think the current discussion around `variable-pitch` is similarly influenced by the fact that that we specified the `:family` (and on top of that the face is called "variable-pitch"), so it's obvious (to us human) that the desired result should not be a monospace font. IOW the context of this discussion implies a bias towards putting more precedence on `:family` but we could restart this discussion replacing "variable-pitch" with "bold" and "family" with "weight" and most of the arguments would hold just as well, just favoring `:weight` this time around :-( In any case, I do support inclusion of your patch on the `emacs-29` branch as "the best solution so far". Stefan