bad default faces now

bad default faces now

[Drew Adams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 450 bytes --]

The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the result is worse, IMO.

I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default faces, but see the
attached screenshot. The faces for the comment, the variable name, and the doc
string are all about the same.

In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'

[-- Attachment #2: throw-emacs-24-bad-face-defaults.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 8679 bytes --]

Re: bad default faces now

[Zhu, Shenli]

On 03/22/2010 01:28 PM, Drew Adams wrote:
> The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the result is worse, IMO.
>
> I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default faces, but see the
> attached screenshot. The faces for the comment, the variable name, and the doc
> string are all about the same.
>
> In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
>   of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
> configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
>    
I think the new face in 23.1 is very clear, at least better than default 
face in 22.x. Can you attach the face you use for comparison?

Thanks,
Shenli

RE: bad default faces now

[Drew Adams]

> > The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the 
> > result is worse, IMO.
> >
> > I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default 
> > faces, but see the attached screenshot. The faces for
> > the comment, the variable name, and the doc
> > string are all about the same.
> >
> > In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
> >   of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
> > Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
> > configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
>
> I think the new face in 23.1 is very clear, at least better 
> than default face in 22.x. Can you attach the face you use
> for comparison?

I don't understand what you're saying or what you're asking.

The faces in Emacs 23.1 are OK. And as far as I can see they are the same as in
Emacs 22.3.

It is the faces in the pretest I cited that are worse.

I'm not crazy about the default faces in Emacs 22 or 23.1 either. I agree with
the motivation behind the change that was made after 23.1: the doc-string text
is too pale.

All I'm saying is that the current default has faces that are commonly used
together that are too similar: similar in hue, saturation, and brightness.

Both the variable-name face and the doc-string face were apparently moved closer
to the comment face. The variable-name face and the comment face are nearly
indistinguisable now, and all three are very close.

Beyond pointing this out, I really don't care much. If no one else thinks this
is bad, then ignore.

Re: bad default faces now

[Zhu, Shenli]

On 03/22/2010 03:35 PM, Drew Adams wrote:
>>> The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the
>>> result is worse, IMO.
>>>
>>> I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default
>>> faces, but see the attached screenshot. The faces for
>>> the comment, the variable name, and the doc
>>> string are all about the same.
>>>
>>> In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
>>>    of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
>>> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
>>> configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
>>>        
>> I think the new face in 23.1 is very clear, at least better
>> than default face in 22.x. Can you attach the face you use
>> for comparison?
>>      
> I don't understand what you're saying or what you're asking.
>    
Me too, and sorry for my poor English :)
> The faces in Emacs 23.1 are OK. And as far as I can see they are the same as in
> Emacs 22.3.
>
> It is the faces in the pretest I cited that are worse.
>
> I'm not crazy about the default faces in Emacs 22 or 23.1 either. I agree with
> the motivation behind the change that was made after 23.1: the doc-string text
> is too pale.
>
> All I'm saying is that the current default has faces that are commonly used
> together that are too similar: similar in hue, saturation, and brightness.
>    
What I mean is maybe you have a better face set?
> Both the variable-name face and the doc-string face were apparently moved closer
> to the comment face. The variable-name face and the comment face are nearly
> indistinguisable now, and all three are very close.
>
> Beyond pointing this out, I really don't care much. If no one else thinks this
> is bad, then ignore.
>
>    

RE: bad default faces now

[Drew Adams]

> What I mean is maybe you have a better face set?

The face set I use is no doubt not appropriate as a default face set for Emacs.

I don't really have a good suggestion for the defaults. I just wanted to signal
that those faces are now hard to distinguish.

Re: bad default faces now

[Leo]

On 2010-03-22 05:28 +0000, Drew Adams wrote:
> The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the result is worse, IMO.
>
> I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default faces, but see the
> attached screenshot. The faces for the comment, the variable name, and the doc
> string are all about the same.
>
> In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
>  of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
> configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'

I also hope that 23.2 will not have the colour scheme it has in 23.1.94.
It makes lisp source code visually very difficult to read, for example.
May it be possible to invite someone who is good at designing colour
themes to contribute or learn from other editor such as textmate?

Leo

Re: bad default faces now

[Lennart Borgman]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2010-03-22 05:28 +0000, Drew Adams wrote:
>> The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the result is worse, IMO.
>>
>> I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default faces, but see the
>> attached screenshot. The faces for the comment, the variable name, and the doc
>> string are all about the same.
>>
>> In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
>>  of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
>> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
>> configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
>
> I also hope that 23.2 will not have the colour scheme it has in 23.1.94.
> It makes lisp source code visually very difficult to read, for example.
> May it be possible to invite someone who is good at designing colour
> themes to contribute or learn from other editor such as textmate?

We discussed this back in last autumn:

 http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/emacs-devel@gnu.org/12638321.html

I made an elisp file to help testing new colors. It is available here:

  http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/font-lock-color-test.el

I think the idea of inviting someone to create new suggestions for
colors is good. Could we please then add them to the test file above
so people can test?

Re: bad default faces now

[Deniz Dogan]

2010/3/22 Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2010-03-22 05:28 +0000, Drew Adams wrote:
>>> The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the result is worse, IMO.
>>>
>>> I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default faces, but see the
>>> attached screenshot. The faces for the comment, the variable name, and the doc
>>> string are all about the same.
>>>
>>> In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
>>>  of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
>>> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
>>> configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
>>
>> I also hope that 23.2 will not have the colour scheme it has in 23.1.94.
>> It makes lisp source code visually very difficult to read, for example.
>> May it be possible to invite someone who is good at designing colour
>> themes to contribute or learn from other editor such as textmate?
>
> We discussed this back in last autumn:
>
>  http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/emacs-devel@gnu.org/12638321.html
>
> I made an elisp file to help testing new colors. It is available here:
>
>  http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/font-lock-color-test.el
>
> I think the idea of inviting someone to create new suggestions for
> colors is good. Could we please then add them to the test file above
> so people can test?
>
>
>

For those with web browsers and JavaScript, there is also this website
which was incidentally posted to the python-mode mailing list a few
hours ago: http://alexpogosyan.com/color-theme-creator/

-- 
Deniz Dogan

Re: bad default faces now

[Leo]

On 2010-03-22 11:19 +0000, Lennart Borgman wrote:
> I made an elisp file to help testing new colors. It is available here:
>
>   http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/font-lock-color-test.el
>
> I think the idea of inviting someone to create new suggestions for
> colors is good. Could we please then add them to the test file above
> so people can test?

Thanks for this. I just run it to see the suggestions. I guess colours
look different on different types of screens.

I think the problem with chong1 on my LCD is keyword and doc-string are
too much alike. Doc string stands out a bit too much.

Leo

Re: bad default faces now

[Chong Yidong]

Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com> writes:

> I also hope that 23.2 will not have the colour scheme it has in 23.1.94.
> It makes lisp source code visually very difficult to read, for example.
> May it be possible to invite someone who is good at designing colour
> themes to contribute or learn from other editor such as textmate?

Unfortunately it seems to depend somewhat on the particular monitor.  On
some monitors, some of the 23.1 colors were difficult to distinguish
from a white background, which is the most important thing.