font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Lennart Borgman]

`font-lock-warning-face' is bold. That makes it very hard to read, at 
least on w32 with default fonts.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Mathias Dahl]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 224 bytes --]

> `font-lock-warning-face' is bold. That makes it very hard to read, at
> least on w32 with default fonts.

It looks quite OK under GNU/Linux, at least in my opinion. See the
attached screenshot. How does it look under w32?

[-- Attachment #2: fontlockwarning.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 33314 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Jason Rumney]

Mathias Dahl wrote:
>> `font-lock-warning-face' is bold. That makes it very hard to read, at
>> least on w32 with default fonts.
>
> It looks quite OK under GNU/Linux, at least in my opinion. See the
> attached screenshot. How does it look under w32?

Not terribly different, if anything slightly easier to read due to 
slightly wider character spacing and a slightly lighter weight of 'bold'.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:30:07 +0100
> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>
> 
> `font-lock-warning-face' is bold. That makes it very hard to read, at 
> least on w32 with default fonts.

I find this face quite readable, in "emacs -Q".  Did you perhaps
change the default colors?  If not, I cannot imagine how can this face
be hard to read, it is IMO one of the most readable faces in Emacs.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 636 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:30:07 +0100
>> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>
>>
>> `font-lock-warning-face' is bold. That makes it very hard to read, at 
>> least on w32 with default fonts.
>>     
>
> I find this face quite readable, in "emacs -Q".  Did you perhaps
> change the default colors?  If not, I cannot imagine how can this face
> be hard to read, it is IMO one of the most readable faces in Emacs.
>   

I have not changed anything regarding this.

Here is how it looks at my display. Could be problem with the display 
driver though. But look at mn, W M.

Picture showing font

[-- Attachment #1.2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 1205 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #1.2.2: fontlockwarn-w32.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 11037 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

RE: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Drew Adams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 283 bytes --]

> Here is how it looks at my display. Could be problem with the
> display driver though. But look at mn, W M.

Aren't you on Windows? Don't you use font-smoothing?
Without it, I see what you see. 
With it (e.g. ClearType), I see the attached.
I think it's quite a bit more readable.

[-- Attachment #2: anti-aliasing.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 24972 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Drew Adams wrote:
>> Here is how it looks at my display. Could be problem with the
>> display driver though. But look at mn, W M.
> 
> Aren't you on Windows? Don't you use font-smoothing?
> Without it, I see what you see. 
> With it (e.g. ClearType), I see the attached.
> I think it's quite a bit more readable.


Yes, it looks much better. Eli and Jason, do you use font smoothing? I 
just use the default and I think that the fonts should look good by default.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Jason Rumney]

Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
> Yes, it looks much better. Eli and Jason, do you use font smoothing? I 
> just use the default and I think that the fonts should look good by 
> default.

Fonts look like they look. Emacs does not have any control over the 
fonts Microsoft chooses to ship with Windows.

And I agree with Eli, the screenshot you sent looks absolutely fine. 
Perhaps your monitor is out of focus?

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Jason Rumney wrote:
> Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
>> Yes, it looks much better. Eli and Jason, do you use font smoothing? I 
>> just use the default and I think that the fonts should look good by 
>> default.
> 
> Fonts look like they look. Emacs does not have any control over the 
> fonts Microsoft chooses to ship with Windows.
> 
> And I agree with Eli, the screenshot you sent looks absolutely fine. 
> Perhaps your monitor is out of focus?


Thanks, but did you see any difference between the screen shot I sent 
and the one Drew sent? On my screen the two pictures look very 
different. Does not that happen on your screen?

The thing is that Drew uses "ClearType" font edge smoothing whereas I 
use the default "Standard". If you zoom in the pictures from me and Drew 
you can see the actual differences. But perhaps it is only me that 
thinks that the default font that Emacs uses here on w32 is not very 
readable unless you change the default MS Windows settings for font edge 
smoothing?

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 03:06:49 +0100
> From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> CC: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org, 
>  Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> 
> Thanks, but did you see any difference between the screen shot I sent 
> and the one Drew sent? On my screen the two pictures look very 
> different. Does not that happen on your screen?

I do see the difference, but the default font, the one you sent, looks
good to me.

> If you zoom in the pictures from me and Drew you can see the actual
> differences.

I'm sure zooming will show differences, but that is irrelevant.  What
is relevant is how the unzoomed font looks, and to me it looks just
fine.

> But perhaps it is only me that thinks that the default font that
> Emacs uses here on w32 is not very readable unless you change the
> default MS Windows settings for font edge smoothing?

Yes, it sounds like only you think so.  Perhaps your monitor is out of
focus, like Jason suggested.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:38:26 +0100
> From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> CC:  emacs-devel@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 
>  Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
> 
> Eli and Jason, do you use font smoothing?

How does one tell?  I don't think I use that, but I want to be sure.

> I just use the default and I think that the fonts should look good
> by default.

But I already told you that the image you sent is the same I see on my
system, and it looks just fine in my opinion.  So AFAICT the default
fonts _do_ look good.

RE: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Drew Adams]

> > Eli and Jason, do you use font smoothing?
>
> How does one tell?  I don't think I use that, but I want to be sure.

As I wrote to Lennart:

> 1. Right-click the desktop. Choose Properties in the pop-up menu.
> 2. Go to the Appearance tab.
> 3. Click the Effects button.

See whether the box described next is checked, and, if so, what the
pull-down value is. Steps 4 & 5 are to set it to ClearType, which is what is
shown in the screenshot I sent.

> 4. Check the box "Use the following method to smooth edges of screen
fonts:"
> 5. Pick a smoothing type with the pull-down list. I use ClearType.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 22:13:01 -0800
> 
> > 1. Right-click the desktop. Choose Properties in the pop-up menu.
> > 2. Go to the Appearance tab.
> > 3. Click the Effects button.
> 
> See whether the box described next is checked, and, if so, what the
> pull-down value is. Steps 4 & 5 are to set it to ClearType, which is what is
> shown in the screenshot I sent.
> 
> > 4. Check the box "Use the following method to smooth edges of screen
> fonts:"
> > 5. Pick a smoothing type with the pull-down list. I use ClearType.

On my system, the method box says "Standard", so I'm no sure that I
don't use ClearType.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 22:13:01 -0800
>>
>>> 1. Right-click the desktop. Choose Properties in the pop-up menu.
>>> 2. Go to the Appearance tab.
>>> 3. Click the Effects button.
>> See whether the box described next is checked, and, if so, what the
>> pull-down value is. Steps 4 & 5 are to set it to ClearType, which is what is
>> shown in the screenshot I sent.
>>
>>> 4. Check the box "Use the following method to smooth edges of screen
>> fonts:"
>>> 5. Pick a smoothing type with the pull-down list. I use ClearType.
> 
> On my system, the method box says "Standard", so I'm no sure that I
> don't use ClearType.


Some points, maybe mostly for the record:

- My display is a TFT display.
- Perhaps I do not use the best driver at the moment, since I am using a 
switch between the PC and the display.
- It looks much better with ClearType on.
- I am quite a bit surprised that Eli and Jason found the font on the 
picture I sent satisfactory. Could it be that it looks different on your 
displays? Though I have a hard time to understand how that should work.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:57:11 +0100
> From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> CC: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > 
> > On my system, the method box says "Standard", so I'm no sure that I
                                                         now
> > don't use ClearType.
> 
> - I am quite a bit surprised that Eli and Jason found the font on the 
> picture I sent satisfactory. Could it be that it looks different on your 
> displays?

I don't know.  All we have is the image you sent, and it looks fine on
my display.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <ulkk1vunm.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> > Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:57:11 +0100
> > From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> > CC: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > > 
> > > On my system, the method box says "Standard", so I'm no sure that I
                                                         now
> > > don't use ClearType.
> > 
> > - I am quite a bit surprised that Eli and Jason found the font on the 
> > picture I sent satisfactory. Could it be that it looks different on your 
> > displays?

> I don't know.  All we have is the image you sent, and it looks fine on
> my display.

Me too.

Please note that what you sent is an captured screen image
which is what your computer want to display, not the actual
image you see on your screen.

So it may be displayed badly on a ill-tuned display, but
displayed clearly on a well-tuned display.

If you want to show exactly how your screen looks like, you
need a good camera.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Mathias Dahl]

> Please note that what you sent is an captured screen image
> which is what your computer want to display, not the actual
> image you see on your screen.
>
> So it may be displayed badly on a ill-tuned display, but
> displayed clearly on a well-tuned display.

I can verify that this can indeed be the case. Earlier this week I was
testing Windows Vista at a collegue's computer and when running it I
wondered why all colors were so ugly? They were all very "white" or
"bleached". I thought "Was this the best they could come up with?" It
turned out, of course, that his flat-screen was totally messed up, the
colours looked bad in Windows XP as well.

Also, Lennart, maybe you need glasses? :) Seriously, I though my
screen was blurry for a couple of years before I discovered I had
astigmatism...

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Kenichi Handa wrote:
>>> - I am quite a bit surprised that Eli and Jason found the font on the 
>>> picture I sent satisfactory. Could it be that it looks different on your 
>>> displays?
> 
>> I don't know.  All we have is the image you sent, and it looks fine on
>> my display.
> 
> Me too.
> 
> Please note that what you sent is an captured screen image
> which is what your computer want to display, not the actual
> image you see on your screen.
> 
> So it may be displayed badly on a ill-tuned display, but
> displayed clearly on a well-tuned display.


Thanks. I am using a TFT display, but do you know if this could 
difference happen because of a somewhat bad display driver too?

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Jason Rumney]

Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
> Thanks. I am using a TFT display, but do you know if this could 
> difference happen because of a somewhat bad display driver too?

A TFT display can look out of focus if it is not running at its native 
resolution. Also if the contrast is low or there is glare on the screen, 
that might make text hard to read.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <45AF3771.5000108@gmail.com>, "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> writes:

> > Please note that what you sent is an captured screen image
> > which is what your computer want to display, not the actual
> > image you see on your screen.
> > 
> > So it may be displayed badly on a ill-tuned display, but
> > displayed clearly on a well-tuned display.

> Thanks. I am using a TFT display, but do you know if this could 
> difference happen because of a somewhat bad display driver too?

Yes.  Usually a TFT display has control buttons for various
manual adjustment.  Clock speed and phase most likely affect
the clearness of thin vertical line.  Those must be adjusted
to the same as the parameters of your video driver.  You may
be able to increase the clearness by adjusting them
manually, but if the driver's parameter is beyond what can
be adjusted manually, you must change the parameters of the
driver (in case of X, for instance, /etc/X11/xorg.conf).
But that work requires expert knowledge.  You may be able to
find how to setup xorg.conf (or XF86Config) for your TFT
display by searching the net.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Stefan Monnier]

> Thanks. I am using a TFT display, but do you know if this could difference
> happen because of a somewhat bad display driver too?

Also a TFT display driven via a VGA rather than DVI connection can look
seriously blurry, depending on the circumstances (especially if you go
through a KVM switch).


        Stefan

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Miles Bader]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> Thanks. I am using a TFT display, but do you know if this could difference
>> happen because of a somewhat bad display driver too?
>
> Also a TFT display driven via a VGA rather than DVI connection can look
> seriously blurry, depending on the circumstances (especially if you go
> through a KVM switch).

My current LCD display (NEC 1760V) is driven from the analogue VGA
connector, but apparently has a good syncing circuit/algorithm because
it seems almost indistinguishable from a digitally driven display --
however some of the VGA-driven LCDs I've seen in stores have been
absolutely awful.

[Of course I'm assuming Lennart is using the right resolution for his
display; if not, it will look horrible no matter what....]

-Miles
-- 
People who are more than casually interested in computers should have at
least some idea of what the underlying hardware is like.  Otherwise the
programs they write will be pretty weird.  -- Donald Knuth

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Mathias Dahl]

> But I already told you that the image you sent is the same I see on my
> system, and it looks just fine in my opinion.  So AFAICT the default
> fonts _do_ look good.

I think I know what Lennart is aiming at; the characters in that face
look a bit "smashed together" in some cases (he mentioned m and n),
making some of them slightly hard to separate from each other. But I
would not say that it is hard to read. Maybe it is not as super crisp
as other faces, but the warning face is not that often used, at least
not in my day to day work in Emacs. My guess is that this face is
meant to be more visible (not readable) so that you notice these
warnings, and I think this bold red face succeeds quite well.

With the font effect that Drew has turned on, it looks even better though.

Re: font-lock-warning-face hard to read because it is bold

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:38:00 +0100
> From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> CC: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>, 
>  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Here is how it looks at my display. Could be problem with the display 
> driver though. But look at mn, W M.

It looks the same on my display, and I don't see anything wrong with
these letters, neither on my display nor in the picture you sent.