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 landed on master Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 19:07:47 +0300 Message-ID: <83zicbhs8c.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83k23jl5ra.fsf@gnu.org> <87h8yjcem0.fsf@gmail.com> <8337a3j8te.fsf@gnu.org> <87shi3j8kt.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1499789292 14368 195.159.176.226 (11 Jul 2017 16:08:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:08:12 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 11 18:08:06 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 1dUxhj-0003Kq-GE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:08:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47292 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxho-0005aj-V6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:08:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43534) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxhc-0005ZE-NH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:07:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxhX-0004N3-Qq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:07:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:36254) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxhX-0004Mw-N0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:07:51 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1359 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxhX-0005HI-6I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:07:51 -0400 In-reply-to: <87shi3j8kt.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Robert Pluim on Tue, 11 Jul 2017 17:29:22 +0200) 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:216487 Archived-At: > From: Robert Pluim > Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 17:29:22 +0200 > > > If you indeed mean continuation lines, I'd like to hear from others > > what they think about this use case. Displaying the empty fields in a > > face different from the number itself is some work, but I will do it > > if that's the "popular demand". > > I can live with it, it just looks a little jarring when there are > continuation lines. OTOH, you immediately see very clearly where the current physical line ends. Anyway, I will wait for additional opinions. Btw, if I were to do this, what other face attributes would you expect to see removed from the empty fields, in addition to background color? Or do you simply want them to be displayed using the line-number face instead? (That could be a different font size.)