Re: supporting more faces on 256 colors xterms

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu>]

"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@elta.co.il> writes:

  > > From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
  > > Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 14:45:28 +0100
  > > 
  > > How about min-colors?
  > 
  > Okay, but what to do with the opposite clause, `ncolors<='?  That
  > would be handy for color-challenged devices.

We don't really need both `ncolors>=' and `ncolors<=', `ncolors>=' (or
whatever we decide to call it) is enough. 

Ordering the `ncolors>=' clauses in decreasing order should be enough.
Example:

(defface foo-face
  '((((class color)(ncolors>= 88)) (:foreground "Firebrick"))
    (((class color)(ncolors>= 16)) (:foreground "red"))
    (t (:weight bold :slant italic)))
  "Foo."
  :group 'foo)


The screenshot at http://www.ics.uci.edu/~dann/emacs.jpg
shows of 2 emacs sessions:
emacs -nw -q --no-site-file
emacs  -q --no-site-file&
that show the font-lock faces changed to use the ncolors>= attribute.

As for the name. I would vote for `min-colors'.