suggestion: blue default for new face `window-divider'

suggestion: blue default for new face `window-divider'

[Drew Adams]

Subject line says it all.  Consider making the window divider more
noticeable by making it a blue line - same color as links (active).

(I'd also suggest that the default width of window dividers be 2,
not zero, also to make it more noticeable.)

Re: suggestion: blue default for new face `window-divider'

[Michael Heerdegen]

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

> Subject line says it all.  Consider making the window divider more
> noticeable by making it a blue line - same color as links (active).

I tried this, but found it distracting.  Once you know it's there, it
must not be that "shining".  I use grey40 now.

> (I'd also suggest that the default width of window dividers be 2,
> not zero, also to make it more noticeable.)

Or at least one, so that you get a different cursor when hovering over
that area, and recognize that resizing is possible.

OTOH, I can understand why the size is 0 when scroll bars are used: It
can happen that you click on the scroll bar by mistake.  In my
installation it is especially problematic that the mouse cursor change
is not correct for me: I get the "dragging" cursor in a stripe wider
than the window divider.  That makes it very likely to click the scroll
bar by mistake.

Michael.

Re: suggestion: blue default for new face `window-divider'

[Juri Linkov]

>> Subject line says it all.  Consider making the window divider more
>> noticeable by making it a blue line - same color as links (active).
>
> I tried this, but found it distracting.  Once you know it's there, it
> must not be that "shining".  I use grey40 now.

The face `vertical-border' inherits from `mode-line-inactive'
which is grey by default, so `window-divider' could do the same.

PS: I don't understand why there are two identical faces
`vertical-border' and `window-divider'.

With no scroll bars, evaluating

  (set-frame-parameter (selected-frame) 'right-divider-width 0)

uses the `vertical-border' face, and allows resizing windows
by dragging the vertical line.

And after

  (set-frame-parameter (selected-frame) 'right-divider-width 1)

`vertical-border' is replaced by `window-divider' with exactly
the same behavior.  Shouldn't these faces be merged?

Re: suggestion: blue default for new face `window-divider'

[martin rudalics]

 >> (I'd also suggest that the default width of window dividers be 2,
 >> not zero, also to make it more noticeable.)
 >
 > Or at least one, so that you get a different cursor when hovering over
 > that area, and recognize that resizing is possible.
 >
 > OTOH, I can understand why the size is 0 when scroll bars are used: It
 > can happen that you click on the scroll bar by mistake.  In my
 > installation it is especially problematic that the mouse cursor change
 > is not correct for me: I get the "dragging" cursor in a stripe wider
 > than the window divider.  That makes it very likely to click the scroll
 > bar by mistake.

We should follow general practice here and make the default at least 4
pixels, probably 6.  That's what I see on Thunderbird, for example.  The
value 0 means only that by default dividers are not drawn.

martin

Re: suggestion: blue default for new face `window-divider'

[martin rudalics]

 > The face `vertical-border' inherits from `mode-line-inactive'
 > which is grey by default, so `window-divider' could do the same.

IMHO the default should imitate the standard 3D effect generally used
for window dividers.  Unfortunately, doing that without prior knowledge
of the respective API primitives is tedious.  It would be a great help
if anyone else could do that.

 > PS: I don't understand why there are two identical faces
 > `vertical-border' and `window-divider'.
 >
 > With no scroll bars, evaluating
 >
 >   (set-frame-parameter (selected-frame) 'right-divider-width 0)
 >
 > uses the `vertical-border' face, and allows resizing windows
 > by dragging the vertical line.
 >
 > And after
 >
 >   (set-frame-parameter (selected-frame) 'right-divider-width 1)
 >
 > `vertical-border' is replaced by `window-divider' with exactly
 > the same behavior.  Shouldn't these faces be merged?

I didn't want to change existing code, so I left `vertical-border'
untouched.  The divider face is used for horizontal dividers as well, so
the name vertical-border would be inappropriate.

Finally, I'm not yet sure how to incorporate the default 3D value
mentioned above in the face definition.

martin

RE: suggestion: blue default for new face `window-divider'

[Drew Adams]

> Finally, I'm not yet sure how to incorporate the default 3D value
> mentioned above in the face definition.

If the how for implementing this gets figured out, perhaps the
user control over it could make use of face attribute `box',
which allows for raised and sunken styles?  IOW, maybe let users
choose the 3D effect by choosing a box with raised style.

Just a thought, as I guess there are two parts to "how to
incorporate ... into the face definition", one part being how
users would choose 3D.

Currently it seems (at least on Windows) that the only attribute
that has an effect is the foreground.  When this face is fully
baked, the doc string should let users know which attributes
have an effect.