From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Fixed-pitch and variable-pitch faces Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:40:50 -0400 Message-ID: <87lk1e4tgd.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: <871w39mcx5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <877icz5rai.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87bq2bus9a.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1213018876 25710 80.91.229.12 (9 Jun 2008 13:41:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 13:41:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, cloos@jhcloos.com, Miles Bader To: Kenichi Handa Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 09 15:41:58 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K5hd9-0005rM-FE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:41:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36548 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K5hcM-0001yb-7y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K5hcI-0001xz-GJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:40:58 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K5hcH-0001wb-6m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:40:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52272 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K5hcG-0001wQ-Lo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:40:56 -0400 Original-Received: from c-98-216-111-182.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.216.111.182]:10650 helo=furry) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K5hcA-0001Z7-Hi; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:40:50 -0400 Original-Received: by furry (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4E36FC056; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:40:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Kenichi Handa's message of "Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:34:56 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:98800 Archived-At: Kenichi Handa writes: >> Is there a reason to think that Emacs does a better job than fontconfig >> at finding a match? > > At least, the current Emacs can know that a font of a > specific family doesn't exist. Does this capability provide any benefit to the user? What I don't yet understand is what problems might arise if Emacs always displays a best-match font, even if there isn't any good match for the :family attribute supplied by the user. As far as I can tell, there isn't any downside.