From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Adam Porter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] tab-line-alternate-colors Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 04:05:24 -0600 Message-ID: <878sa0u2hn.fsf@alphapapa.net> References: <87360autpy.fsf@alphapapa.net> <87mtyiqfzv.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87tusqt3yr.fsf@alphapapa.net> <87wnxl760u.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87h7opt3a4.fsf@alphapapa.net> <87blewpwf5.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7154"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 14 11:07:29 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1koklM-0001lF-HX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:07:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48804 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1koklL-0005mV-J0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 05:07:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36376) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kokjV-0003zn-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 05:05:33 -0500 Original-Received: from static.214.254.202.116.clients.your-server.de ([116.202.254.214]:49122 helo=ciao.gmane.io) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kokjT-0006nc-Co for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 05:05:32 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kokjQ-0009mQ-JX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:05:28 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:260794 Archived-At: Juri Linkov writes: >> Okay, here's my next proposal: The tab-line-tab-face-default function >> returns a face, and then a new option, tab-line-tab-face-modifiers, is a >> list of functions, each of which is called with that face and returns >> it, possibly modified. > > Thanks, tab-line-tab-face-modifiers is a good idea. It's like hooks > used to post-process the result. But the '-hooks' suffix is deprecated, > and the new standard is to end such variable names in '-functions'. > Then using the name tab-line-tab-face-functions will also avoid ambiguity > of the word 'modifiers' that is mostly applied to key modifiers - > there is already the option tab-bar-select-tab-modifiers. Sure, I'll change that in the next patch. > Then tab-line-tab-face-functions will obsolete the need to have an > almost duplicate option tab-line-tab-face-function. But then we have > two variants: > > 1. add tab-line-tab-face-default to tab-line-tab-face-functions by default. > > 2. remove tab-line-tab-face-default and leave its code in tab-line-format-template > as before, with a supposition that it should be sufficient to customize > tab-line-tab-face-functions to post-process its output face. > > What variant would you prefer? Hmm, I'm not sure which is best. #1 might be the cleanest in theory, but it would seem to conflate the two types of functions: the initial face-determining function and the face-modifying functions. So that variant would seem to require one of two approaches: a) require the function tab-line-tab-face-default to be first in the list of functions (which would be error-prone), or b) modify the function tab-line-tab-face-default to work as a face-modifier so it could work regardless of its position in the list (and it would need to be able to start from a nil face, which might be awkward). OTOH, #2 would minimize the diff from master and avoid the problems that #1 would seem to present. So I suppose I would choose variant #2, although I don't have a strong preference, and I might be overlooking something that would make #1 a better choice. WDYT? Thanks.