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: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 06:33:15 +0300 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> <874qb7k65j.fsf@jurta.org> <87fyunwph1.fsf@jurta.org> <87mzoudrff.fsf@jurta.org> <87slyllarb.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1121139469 19291 80.91.229.2 (12 Jul 2005 03:37:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 03:37:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 12 05:37:48 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DsBaO-0003St-DC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 05:37:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DsBbz-0007Sv-AE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:39:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DsBbm-0007Pv-59 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:38:58 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DsBbi-0007Nm-T2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:38:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DsBbi-0007MC-HI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:38:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.66] (helo=romy.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DsBdp-0007io-Tb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:41:06 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-68-34.inter.net.il [80.230.68.34]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id BVD04822 (AUTH halo1); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 06:33:15 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:46:43 -0400) 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:40812 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:40812 > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:46:43 -0400 > Cc: juri@jurta.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > >> Maybe the shadow face should be fixed instead. > > > Why? It does what it's supposed to do: makes the text barely visible. > > Then why isn't it good for the `diff-context' face? Well, I didn't suggest to change it in the first place, so I really am not the man to ask. I guess the idea is that diff context needs to be readable after all. > Or more specifically, why is it only good for `diff-context' on color > terminals with more than 88 colors? Probably because, with more than 88 colors, the shadow face is more readable than the current color on 16- and 8-color tty's. > It should work just fine on gray-level terminals Yes, those should need a separate definition, if we change the current one. > and if the result is completely unreadable on terminals with less > than 88 colors, thenwhy shouldn't that problem also be fixed for the > `shadow' face? It's not ``completely unreadable'', at least not in my opinion.