From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Alex Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Native line numbers, final testing Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 21:50:59 -0600 Message-ID: <87vamfg8kc.fsf@lylat> References: <83y3s9pm2a.fsf@gnu.org> <87fuecc7vg.fsf@lylat> <83y3s2n5pa.fsf@gnu.org> <878tk1rmjx.fsf@lylat> <83a84gn4z9.fsf@gnu.org> <837ezkmwfg.fsf@gnu.org> <874lumps82.fsf@lylat> <8337a5ja4p.fsf@gnu.org> <83van0i5wl.fsf@gnu.org> <87iniy7ksy.fsf@lylat> <83pod6idqp.fsf@gnu.org> <87zical61u.fsf@lylat> <83mv89ivms.fsf@gnu.org> <87zic9a7tg.fsf@lylat> <8360exijpe.fsf@gnu.org> <87r2xla0e4.fsf@lylat> <8337a1hxhb.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1959dsv.fsf@lylat> <83y3rsgwkk.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1501041090 11714 195.159.176.226 (26 Jul 2017 03:51:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 03:51:30 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 26 05:51:25 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 1daDM0-0002WW-I2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 05:51:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35827 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1daDM4-00032g-GE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 23:51:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55012) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1daDLu-00032N-Vw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 23:51:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1daDLr-00006J-41 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 23:51:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-it0-x242.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::242]:36401) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1daDLq-00006F-Ue; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 23:51:11 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-it0-x242.google.com with SMTP id r9so9965847ita.3; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 20:51:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=4Z4576HduwaNpTGlfaTfgBRSMUHu/17qMyGONjMSr9M=; b=X7HmK9yJWsSTrW0bDQQHm9eNBSeCrajheaj+5Gjqn5x5jXNXqNjcUkkFNH2G9a41pa Mzsss9oK/JQFXZqmFpsxn1+IACXgvG9uz4KJD6VqygwCLkpLe3BJgSSNCm8MR9kiO4Ky YjEa9g1A8O8kEJy7RM2K/+4USmZkZfUrBeiajoCVEiv//utLtfKAlDI7lNjCKfVzq5dS bUJTHvd8bhRUNeurneVaA9Vz7TTz/fyTyL982kfV/DqoHjBYsiRCYiGSFRn4DRqBTHlE 4FZppENM16k2ha4PJoefgj0VLeXiFBpioAWtfdWX5H+UmnKF4k2Hd6Lj7V0Ce5JaCmiQ Z1Mw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=4Z4576HduwaNpTGlfaTfgBRSMUHu/17qMyGONjMSr9M=; b=drofYl5MWgLwtnnbtHU1EvyBi8fGF5GbSVKJ+zYnCbZndf9SpkZHAMQX31eWya4DyA xsGg5O+c9UXFlCfHaeqF0C4FZamgFJAXEuayWGHJ+YOkaHbCnEa5gecFTKzyLvvslf0X CaXQ4A0WLbVF9cR0wF0V08RkClRcxz1iAMbdtpbaQ9HFIWURr2pK4y477+7LXURN8VMd 77MZotXC3+tZRko1vx/IuxaZw4gPh2GJLCB53K3aW74y+ds/29f8gb3zXQkKazRCZP0l 8c4Jlz7Ghtbddjg33CIo3QN3heUCDCVBCJfdyL8jViYkWjohXeVQrCKttpK6ZVg/L5uR dGxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw1107e8+oNPSlXu0e5NKYqmuzRTVXaZ+0zGTuXhrSNer7GaeFHAIM Pn+C4sDEpVYNly3v X-Received: by 10.36.46.15 with SMTP id i15mr3152610ita.75.1501041069888; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 20:51:09 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from lylat (S010664777d9cebe3.ss.shawcable.net. [70.64.85.59]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i133sm7479862ioi.31.2017.07.25.20.51.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 25 Jul 2017 20:51:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83y3rsgwkk.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:56:11 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::242 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:217032 Archived-At: Sorry for not replying sooner. Hopefully the fixed-pitch issue is behind us now. Eli Zaretskii writes: > Disagreements about defaults are > frequently like that, they can only be resolved by collecting enough > opinions and experiences; 2 opposite experiences are definitely not > enough. Fair enough. >> > I don't think I understood what you consider a bug here. Face >> > attributes are calculated when the face is created, they are not >> > updated whenever the default face changes. >> >> Not in the case of 'unspecified, right? Evaluating (set-face-bold >> 'default t) changes every face with an 'unspecified bold attribute to >> bold. > > Yes, but face remapping is not implemented by setting attributes of > existing faces. It (internally) produces new faces and redirects > existing faces to those new ones. And I think there's a good reason > for that: we definitely do NOT want _all_ the faces to change their > sizes to follow the remapping of 'default'. For starters, we only > want the faces to change in the current buffer, and we don't want > faces like 'tooltip' and 'mode-line' to change even for the current > buffer. That makes sense, but I still don't understand why explicitly inheriting from default makes a difference for face remapping. Is it just a hardcoded workaround? >> So if I'm understanding this correctly, then you shouldn't have to >> inherit from 'default since any unspecified attributes already fallback >> to 'default. The behaviour in this case is different, therefore this is >> a bug (something isn't handling face-remapping-alist correctly). > > face-remapping-alist is only handled where we decided to handle it, > and I think I at least partially understand why, see above. Would it make sense to handle it in the line-number area?