From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6693: 24.0.50; font-lock-(builtin|doc) faces are *way* too close Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:15:17 -0700 Message-ID: <74221634EBB8403589F38AE4BDAE42F8@us.oracle.com> References: <05CB9D294C4646D5A2F574AB5A9DFA55@us.oracle.com><13C511D445304C4C94EE650D4796ECD0@us.oracle.com><4E110EB6.3060407@harpegolden.net> <87oc1a4vyx.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1309756591 21173 80.91.229.12 (4 Jul 2011 05:16:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:16:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen' , 6693@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Chong Yidong'" , "'David De La Harpe Golden'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 04 07:16:27 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbWE-0005zs-Ja for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 07:16:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37878 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbWD-0004lk-7g for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:16:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:49983) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbVs-0004kB-Pb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:16:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbVr-0005pi-7K for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:16:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:60268) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbVq-0005pe-RY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:16:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbVq-0008Jl-41; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:16:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 05:16:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6693 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6693-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6693.130975654831951 (code B ref 6693); Mon, 04 Jul 2011 05:16:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6693) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jul 2011 05:15:48 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbVb-0008JI-Ls for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:15:47 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QdbVZ-0008J5-36 for 6693@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:15:45 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id p645Fa4W021707 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:15:38 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p645FZNE029995 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:15:36 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt112.oracle.com (abhmt112.oracle.com [141.146.116.64]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p645FU0P022054; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 00:15:30 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.32.87) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 22:15:30 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87oc1a4vyx.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Thread-Index: Acw58qA7GFs3cd6VSMKbqiLsHk+TZwAFQVZA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109 X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090207.4E114C7B.0013:SCFMA922111,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:16:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:47920 Archived-At: > As for font-lock-builtin-face, changing it back to Orchid is no good; > that shade is far too light, at least on the LCD monitors I've used > Emacs on. FWIW, I disagree (on the LCD monitors I've used). > I wouldn't mind changing it to something completely different > though, e.g. midnight blue. We have too may purplish colors in the > default palette anyway. A priori I have nothing against changing it to something completely different. Dunno about midnight blue. I mainly see font-lock with Emacs-Lisp code (in my use), and ther is nothing similar to midnight blue there. On the other hand, midnight blue is not too different from black (the default foreground). `list-faces-display' shows nothing super close to midnight blue (and nothing close at all in the font-lock faces). But it looks like the medium blue of `minibuffer-prompt-face' is already quite dark and not too easily distinguished from black. My guess is that midnight blue would be too dark (too close to black). I suggest that you do your best to pick another color, if you disagree with `Orchid', and that people try it for a while to see (discuss). This is obviously not the most important bug. But if we can better separate these two faces that would be good. Note that (at least in Emacs-Lisp code) this face is used for coloring only keywords: `:type', `:group' etc. It is not for coloring large spans of text that someone needs to read. The point in coloring the keywords is just to draw attention - they do not need to be super-readable (as does a doc string, for instance). That's another reason I don't think a face like `Orchid' was a bad choice.