From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Native line numbers, final testing Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 21:38:53 +0300 Message-ID: <8360exijpe.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83y3s9pm2a.fsf@gnu.org> <87mv8nkh31.fsf@lylat> <83bmp3pnmb.fsf@gnu.org> <87eftzju5g.fsf@lylat> <837ezqq3gd.fsf@gnu.org> <874luuyuqy.fsf@lylat> <83wp7po86m.fsf@gnu.org> <87fuecc7vg.fsf@lylat> <83y3s2n5pa.fsf@gnu.org> <878tk1rmjx.fsf@lylat> <83a84gn4z9.fsf@gnu.org> <837ezkmwfg.fsf@gnu.org> <874lumps82.fsf@lylat> <8337a5ja4p.fsf@gnu.org> <83van0i5wl.fsf@gnu.org> <87iniy7ksy.fsf@lylat> <83pod6idqp.fsf@gnu.org> <87zical61u.fsf@lylat> <83mv89ivms.fsf@gnu.org> <87zic9a7tg.fsf@lylat> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1499884758 28025 195.159.176.226 (12 Jul 2017 18:39:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:39:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cloos@jhcloos.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alex Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 12 20:39:13 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dVMXU-0006gP-7K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 20:39:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55204 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dVMXX-0004SN-Sg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:39:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51445) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dVMXL-0004R7-LB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:39:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dVMXI-0006WD-II for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:38:59 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:56050) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dVMXI-0006Vw-Es; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:38:56 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3039 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dVMXH-0000S8-M0; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:38:56 -0400 In-reply-to: <87zic9a7tg.fsf@lylat> (message from Alex on Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:22:51 -0600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:216557 Archived-At: > From: Alex > Cc: cloos@jhcloos.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:22:51 -0600 > > > It should be sensible, I agree. But "sensible" doesn't necessarily > > mean identical to the default face's font. > > Sure, but I maintain in this case that it does mean identical to the > default face's font. I don't understand why, and I don't think I agree. > It ensures, usually, proper size and a non-clashing style. No one said these are necessarily our goals. Not everything shown on the initial frame uses the same font, so why should line numbers be required to? > If someone customizes their default face, then they could customize > the line-number face similarly. That's harsh on users, and exactly the reason why I made this change. It might be a mistake, but I'd like to hear more opinions before I make up my mind. > Everyone else shouldn't have to do any customization. They (and you) don't need to. I only mentioned customization because you didn't like the default. Good defaults are supposed to be good for many users, but they aren't required to satisfy everyone, as long as things are customizable. > > How are fixed-pitch* different from any other face that doesn't > > inherit from default? > > Going into this discussion, I figured that fixed-pitch* would be exactly > like default, except enforcing, well, fixed-pitch; similarly for > variable-pitch. But that's obviously not the intent, as the code shows and the comments explain. > (insert (propertize "hello there!" 'face 'fixed-pitch)) > > This text increases along with the default face with "C-x +". Why does > the same not apply to the line-number face? I don't know. Feel free to investigate and publish the findings.