From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: can't set both mode-line color and default frame font? Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:57:33 -0700 Message-ID: References: <10843.128.165.0.81.1190165876.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1190174318 5370 80.91.229.12 (19 Sep 2007 03:58:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 03:58:38 +0000 (UTC) To: Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 19 05:58:37 2007 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 1IXqhv-0006eP-OP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqhu-0008Dm-8X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:58:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqhq-0008Bt-JA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:58:30 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqho-00088m-DX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:58:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqho-00088h-6g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:58:28 -0400 Original-Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IXqhn-0001Jh-OS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:58:27 -0400 Original-Received: from agmgw1.us.oracle.com (agmgw1.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.212]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id l8J3wPDG012718 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:58:25 -0600 Original-Received: from acsmt350.oracle.com (acsmt350.oracle.com [141.146.40.150]) by agmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id l8IApi60030921 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:58:24 -0600 Original-Received: from dhcp-amer-csvpn-gw1-141-144-66-217.vpn.oracle.com by acsmt350.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3225284701190174240; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:57:20 -0700 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <10843.128.165.0.81.1190165876.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:79269 Archived-At: > I meant that if Lisp does choose -to- customize, that should > take precedence because it is a choice (there's your reason). And setting a face preference via an X resource is _not_ choosing? I still don't see an argument (a reason) that applies only to `custom-file' and not to X resources. Flip it around, and it makes just as much sense (little). > There's nothing stopping us from supporting any or all of these: > > (customize-face-override-resources 'default '((:background ...))) > (customize-face-defer-to-resources 'default '((:foreground ...))) > ;; or > (customize-face 'default '((:stipple ...))) ; always overrides resources > (load-resources here) ; ok, now we override > customize > (customize-face 'fringe '((:box ...))) ; this overrides them again > > The question is whether that's better or worse (I said "complicated" as > the metric) than doing something clever in a custom-file (or .emacs) or in > C when loading these preferences. AFAICT, instead of an argument _why_ Lisp (.emacs or `custom-file') should take precedence over X resources, you've assumed that it does, and then shown that we could code some Lisp that controls (implements) precedence. That assumes that that Lisp code is in control. Anyway, I doubt we're going to get anywhere with this tack. I was hoping someone had a good reason for such a precedence choice, but it doesn't matter. As I said, I see no special reason against it.