From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: TTY Vertical divider face? Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 08:00:49 +0900 Message-ID: References: <878y1nobtb.fsf@jurta.org> <87is0q9s4i.fsf@jurta.org> Reply-To: snogglethorpe@gmail.com, miles@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1118185514 8276 80.91.229.2 (7 Jun 2005 23:05:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 23:05:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: len@reeltwo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 08 01:05:08 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dfn7d-0002pl-LP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 01:04:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DfnEE-0001G0-EL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:11:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DfnCe-0000sk-19 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:09:48 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DfnCZ-0000pe-6T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:09:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DfnCX-0000md-MW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:09:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [64.233.184.199] (helo=wproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Dfn7P-0004sg-PN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:04:23 -0400 Original-Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 40so9433wri for ; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:00:49 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UF8og0PMf0E5JPkrUMB/BjeWdB2ywoLe1p5+PzjSdHjrj2ZRKVZcRNEYOK2QrRwAis/4tzewEtdelrH5/p4XneXgrCNBrbNY9pPiT7D/dSMIodJGXCgm2gHPexd9RhpsNjbxNE9Sc6vwHiyInRtyNnQwLvjSmLJj7eKu9dbcs5o= Original-Received: by 10.54.20.40 with SMTP id 40mr28476wrt; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.54.19.31 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Jun 2005 16:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: Juri Linkov In-Reply-To: <87is0q9s4i.fsf@jurta.org> Content-Disposition: inline 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:38286 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:38286 On 6/8/05, Juri Linkov wrote: > > Should it use a different face >=20 > I think yes. I'd personally set its both background and foreground > colors to "white" to display the vertical border as a solid > 1-character-wide white line. Hmmm, it's an interesting idea in that it displays a "dashless" block by default, but still does the right thing if the terminal doesn't handle reverse-video for some reason (this used to be an issue in the '80s anyway :-). However I think doing that makes it harder to follow the user's customizations, since such a face couldn't just inherit from `mode-line' (it could inherit, but then would have to set the foreground to something explicit, which would often be wrong for customized mode-line faces). A slightly more complex alternative would be to do a "face displayable" test on the "vertical divider" face, and if it's displayable, use a space instead of "|" as the character... Then just inheriting directly from mode-line would work usually. > > (note that the actual face that ends up being used by this code is > > `mode-line-inactive', even though the code says MODE_LINE_FACE_ID; > > I'm not sure why this is)? >=20 > I tried your patch, but instead of either `mode-line' or > `mode-line-inactive' it displays the vertical border in the > `fringe' face. But maybe this is good. We can reuse `fringe' > face for the vertical border because fringes are not available > on text-only terminals. It sounds like it's randomly choosing some other face than what was requested, which I think is not good even if it often works out...:-)=20 I'll try to see what's going on... -Miles --=20 Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.