From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: incomplete comment colorization in terminals Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:34:58 -0700 Message-ID: <200803150834.m2F8YwE6011881@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> References: <20080311231514.B718249C0BB@daedalus.stanford.edu> <200803120644.m2C6i8fa000584@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <18391.37244.140676.65895@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <200803130638.m2D6cILZ010032@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <200803132244.m2DMioqZ025396@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <18393.50421.367537.81004@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <200803140034.m2E0YVPa020528@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <18395.21669.736735.483506@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205570173 11273 80.91.229.12 (15 Mar 2008 08:36:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 08:36:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: riepel@networking.stanford.edu, emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org To: Nick Roberts Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 15 09:36:41 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JaRsd-000432-Bf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 09:36:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JaRs3-00058t-Vm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:36:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaRry-00058o-8Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:58 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaRrw-00058c-BH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JaRrw-00058Z-1N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JaRrv-0007jY-N1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JaRrv-000340-DJ for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JaRrs-0007id-8a for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:55 -0400 Original-Received: from sallyv1.ics.uci.edu ([128.195.1.109]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JaRro-0007ho-3C; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:48 -0400 X-ICS-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206174899.50359@eKWIw0OtbNZZnXT7uXvihg Original-Received: from mothra.ics.uci.edu (mothra.ics.uci.edu [128.195.6.93]) by sallyv1.ics.uci.edu (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7) with ESMTP id m2F8YwE6011881; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:34:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <18395.21669.736735.483506@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> (Nick Roberts's message of "Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:46:29 +1300") Original-Lines: 39 X-ICS-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ICS-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-1.44, required 5, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44) X-ICS-MailScanner-From: dann@mothra.ics.uci.edu X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:92659 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:21589 Archived-At: Nick Roberts writes: > > > > > I tried that in `font-lock-comment-face', and it is ok, > > > > > > > > In that case, please let's go with that solution, it is the lower > > > > complexity solution, and less surprising for the user. We have > > > > gotten a few bug reports from users that were confused by this (it is > > > > not immediately intuitive). > > > > > > I feel that you're using journalistic techniques to steam roller through > > > your wishes. Let's look at the full quote: > > > > > > I tried that in `font-lock-comment-face', and it is ok, but > > > having the text in white is clearer and easier to read. > > > > > > I think it conveys quite a different impression. > > > > > > All these stylistic changes that you are making are probably not worth > > > arguing about but I think you should look for some real agreement that > > > they are an improvement before making them. > > > > Do you have a point here? It's unclear what you are trying to say. > > I just think that you are only listening to the parts that you want to > hear. Maybe that's why my message is unclear to you. OK, I wanted to make sure that you were not trying to make a technical point, just to attack. Your behavior is out of line, please keep it off the list and out of my mailbox too. Yes, it is customary not quote too much when replying to a message. In this case the issue is not that complicated to not remember the whole context, and don't worry RMS understands perfectly what it is. And I hope he gets what I am trying to say too. We were just having a technical discussion, as we've have many in the past. Not sure what exactly you are trying to obtain here, but doing it this way is not the best.