From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Vitalie Spinu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: font-lock-maximum-decoration should be 2 by default? Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 12:50:14 +0200 Organization: EUR Message-ID: <87vcgf88bd.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87wr0x8zxj.fsf@gmail.com> <831uj5bnid.fsf@gnu.org> <87obm98trc.fsf@gmail.com> <95FA6116C6194DAAA658F916B48C5E23@us.oracle.com> <874no12tan.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <83y5ld9seg.fsf@gnu.org> <177186CBFE1741FCBBB8F3D2A57ACB00@us.oracle.com> <83wr0wadnw.fsf@gnu.org> <877gsv7grw.fsf@gnu.org> <28D1904F32094411B543B748956D9F85@us.oracle.com> <87y5lb5zd4.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1345373434 12239 80.91.229.3 (19 Aug 2012 10:50:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 10:50:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , Drew Adams , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jason Rumney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 19 12:50:33 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T335S-0001aE-IW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 12:50:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56985 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T335R-00042p-0k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 06:50:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54843) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T335O-00042j-Jo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 06:50:27 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T335N-0003oW-LG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 06:50:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com ([209.85.212.177]:45251) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T335J-0003lR-Ma; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 06:50:21 -0400 Original-Received: by wibhn17 with SMTP id hn17so2524438wib.12 for ; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 03:50:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:organization:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=yFETZsy/g0gYCa6wiN+BzP344by1EBfKw94PNy2mdtE=; b=zIxC1tAHK4ZWBkMmeN5P8FiNjC/bG7ZHNnliAQpqwgvLUJK0G+X5k2v/6US2vF065C h30QBL/FmyxknHMaEaigu2Zd5fSxvK7het674u9OqKQyE2iwSq9p1gdiBtzyGGGjgFsx JeTuHVJ+HElyZmGapNsPX2lJQImXeMHPamBnmW6snP5jkGXLxSeu4hBGNOwHicDlMP0G 2hPOCdxQVsHTPcmEIgKJFccxuBdIppXhHXoeArx8EdhRlj3uPjIrltJw/jw5OA7xZm5X UXZZiP2V6cDtK9KSv9TRTZBJqrEP6SeqPts0oJfGuKZ8ibimb4KOE6cbnnbKiynx6b32 jx/A== Original-Received: by 10.180.14.8 with SMTP id l8mr19783342wic.6.1345373418640; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 03:50:18 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost (i108036.upc-i.chello.nl. [62.195.108.36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id cl8sm21414530wib.10.2012.08.19.03.50.16 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 19 Aug 2012 03:50:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87y5lb5zd4.fsf@gnu.org> (Jason Rumney's message of "Sun, 19 Aug 2012 11:34:15 +0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130004 (Ma Gnus v0.4) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.212.177 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:152667 Archived-At: >> Jason Rumney >> on Sun, 19 Aug 2012 11:34:15 +0800 wrote: > "Drew Adams" writes: >> Uh, where do you see ANYTHING there that supports the claim that "the" reason >> why the variable was _introduced_ in the first place was "to get snappier >> display"? > To have this suddenly become an issue in 2012 is somewhat of a surprise. Issue in 2012 is unrelated to performance. And for some reason this thread is drifting away from the original request. The request was to set font-lock-maximum-decoration to 2, in order to give to mode developers a much higher flexibility in choosing the default highlighting, and providing users with higher optional levels of fortification. Setting it to t, or removing altogether, imposes one-side-fits-all philosophy, which is absurd in the case of such a subjective matter as font-lock. Vitalie.