From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: BIKESHED: completion faces Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 19:05:22 +0200 Message-ID: <83h83eb8od.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87zhhaxalt.fsf@gmail.com> <83bltpgffr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tv7gg9oz.fsf@gnu.org> <83r22kg8pa.fsf@gnu.org> <20191106205133.njij3ve7qqy7yh3q@Ergus> <83ftizg4nr.fsf@gnu.org> <8336ezg2vm.fsf@gnu.org> <83wocbelu1.fsf@gnu.org> <83imnvegcp.fsf@gnu.org> <83ftizeelw.fsf@gnu.org> <83bltne6oq.fsf@gnu.org> <87lfsrqs63.fsf@gmail.com> <838soqeuzr.fsf@gnu.org> <87ftiyn07t.fsf@gmail.com> <8336eycvpf.fsf@gnu.org> <83pni2bcws.fsf@gnu.org> <83imnubax9.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="15320"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: spacibba@aol.com, dgutov@yandex.ru, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 08 18:13:00 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iT7oi-0003pI-8K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 18:13:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57962 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iT7oh-0003ro-4T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 12:12:59 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38743) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iT7hW-00050o-Rx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 12:05:35 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50864) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iT7hV-0000pY-QG; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 12:05:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3911 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iT7hU-0007p9-Qn; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 12:05:33 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= on Fri, 8 Nov 2019 16:27:36 +0000) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:241989 Archived-At: > From: João Távora > Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 16:27:36 +0000 > Cc: Ergus , emacs-devel , > Stefan Monnier , Dmitry Gutov > > > It's possible, though perhaps not optimal. I'd prefer to try to use > > the same faces, and have their names explain what they do in a > > sufficiently generalized way which would fit all styles. > > I'm afraid this particular goal is irreconcilable with a freshly > installed Emacs having, __by default__: > > 1. 'basic' style give prominence to the "first different character" > 2. 'flex' style give prominence to the pattern's characters. AFAIU, Stefan wants to highlight the pattern's characters in basic style as well. So the gap is not so large after all. AFAIU, you are just saying that you don't want to highlight any characters with the "first different" face, in which case just don't put that face on any character. Though I don't quite understand why you are so against highlighting possible next character(s). > UNLESS, of course that elusive face name is something > deliberately vague and generic like 'completion-emphasis' or > 'completion-prominence', what you call obfuscation of the specific > meaning. So "fit all styles" conflicts with "reveal the specific > meaning". I think you assign too much significance to the face names. We should instead try to make the highlighting of different styles more consistent. Highlighting only the matched part by one style and only the next suggested characters to type is a starking difference, and I think it will confuse users who have several styles in the alist. > Therefore, I propose we take the the "not-optimal" and "possible" > route. I think you give up too early.