Re: custom-themes BAD?

[Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net>]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> > All the packages should be using font-lock-* faces as far as
>> > possible.  Then the themes can all set the same set of faces
>> > much more easily.
>> 
>> Better yet, packages should define their own faces but use the :inherit
>> property to derive them from Emacs' standard faces. That way, users can
>> customize faces in some mode/package and use the default ones in others,
>> if they prefer.
>
> Exactly.  And it's not just "better *yet*", as if the first
> suggestion itself represented some improvement but not the
> best improvement.  The first approach is generally misguided, IMO.
>
> It is simply not the case that "all packages should be using
> font-lock-* faces as far as possible."  That is bad advice, IMO.
> Package designers should use their heads, keeping the package users
> foremost in mind.
>
> I also wonder about this part:
>
>> > Then the themes can all set the same set of faces much more
>> > easily.
>
> Why should I care how easy it is for "themes to set" the same
> set of faces?  What I care about is how easy it is for users
> to customize a set of faces.  And for users of themes to control
> them.
>
> Now if it is the case that custom themes are "BAD", in that there
> is no easy way to customize a set of faces across multiple
> themes, then that would be something missing in the design of
> custom themes.  That would not surprise me, but I'm no expert on
> custom themes.

Just looking at the discrepancy between manoj-dark and the other
themes should make the problem clear.

-- 
Dan Espen