From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Diff mode faces Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:13:04 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87oea5urwm.fsf@jurta.org> <87psujj0h0.fsf@jurta.org> <86hdfv1y9b.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> <87r7eyqzcy.fsf@jurta.org> <200506191710.j5JHAEN11479@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <877jgfi40l.fsf@jurta.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1120210446 23201 80.91.229.2 (1 Jul 2005 09:34:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:34:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 01 11:33:57 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DoHu5-00016F-4u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 11:33:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DoI2V-0001fX-GC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:42:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DoHxn-0007xt-KS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:37:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DoHxm-0007x3-I3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:37:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DoHsd-00060i-Hv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:32:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.66] (helo=romy.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DoHgt-00016Y-Fv; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:20:07 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-65-72.inter.net.il [80.230.65.72]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id BSF40692 (AUTH halo1); Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:13:03 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-reply-to: (rms@gnu.org) 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:40021 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:40021 > From: "Richard M. Stallman" > CC: teirllm@dms.auburn.edu, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, > merlyn@stonehenge.com > Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:30:23 -0400 > > On TTY it classifies colors as follows: > > Dark: black red green blue > Light: magenta yellow cyan white > > But on xterm it is quite different: > > Dark: black red green blue magenta yellow cyan > Light: white > > That anomaly could be worth fixing. I think that's not an anomaly, but a bug. Juri, can you explain how did this happen? If that's an 8-color xterm, then the code in tty-color-values should not distinguish between xterm and any other 8-color TTY. If the xterm in question supports more than 8 colors, please tell the details, including how many colors it supports, how were the colors set up, and how did you test the above classification. > OTOH, the formula I proposed in January produces the same > classification on TTY, xterm and X as: > > Dark: black red green blue magenta > Light: yellow cyan white > > Could you propose it again now? A formula that classifies red and magenta the same on X and on a TTY is probably not very good, since the TTY's "red" is much darker that the X's "red". See the WARNING in the comments near the beginning of tty-colors.el, for more about this.