From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Incorrect font weight selected Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 21:07:10 +0200 Message-ID: <838rvu9f35.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87pmpv708h.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83r1abcb93.fsf@gnu.org> <87y24jqahr.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83ilvnc6z4.fsf@gnu.org> <875yrmyk8q.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <87y24grwp6.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <877dbzo98z.fsf@gnus.org> <83bl1b12b5.fsf@gnu.org> <837dbz112w.fsf@gnu.org> <71a9cd97-02a6-79d7-6af8-b4aef3d1baa8@yandex.ru> <83y24eyww3.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnjyt9yd.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83sfumyr9c.fsf@gnu.org> <877dbe86tv.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83ee5m9kp7.fsf@gnu.org> <87r19mulkg.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83bl0q9hz6.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtkaujbs.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5004"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Yuri D'Elia Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 05 20:09:25 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n5Bf0-00013j-VD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 20:09:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45436 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5Bez-0005wV-0F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 14:09:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52094) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5Bcl-0004M5-5M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 14:07:04 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=49740 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5Bci-0001Tk-0o; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 14:07:00 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=JUXERTADqdpRfADECM2eE6E7PWPq1ZtCU44yuDr/uwQ=; b=Dn0is60IwwWO MffiwPQQmufGXkdkfu1kyHTZBcg0mYs3lZz5g3b7oebhQvdjzaPLSiBjLvt80xDd2eyMz5Ly6/Km0 byY1uQhZiEBkTWJyBoKWgWt1QnAqqiRYKcwX5zteWrihcQAEh9VjJJH4bVOKayN584PjHHlYhOqkp VIgr52exQqfOuhMslsfygHgEQ/aVmodmgiV8y29pgw2xNShFOAIWAF+6m5jGSeFNT2FLiDCWKKUFC iyMptj7bo4WnoyXjG/dXTJVYwTp43RhFHiJ9mOPBX3A+0kD/rg7Bf3C9j9Z9U3quPgFMnFcgQttZz uS4v268BVF1a12CYnX9YfA==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3451 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5Bch-0001VD-T1; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 14:07:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87mtkaujbs.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> (message from Yuri D'Elia on Wed, 05 Jan 2022 19:08:21 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:284267 Archived-At: > From: Yuri D'Elia > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, larsi@gnus.org, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 19:08:21 +0100 > > > I don't think this would be correct, since frames are supposed to be > > independent wrt faces. > > MMh, yes, and no? I definitely understand this reasoning, and we need to > support that no questions here. But purely as as user, when I'm editing > with multiple frames and I change the default font I certainly want all > old and new frames to change as a result, which is why we have this odd > dance. Your expectations are in general incorrect. They are due to the fact that calling set-face-font and similar APIs without the optional FRAME argument arranges for the change to affect all frames. But the low-level code which implements set-face-font only changes the face of a single frame, and doesn't touch the face definition on other frames. And the default font generally stands for the font of the default face of the frame on which you change that face, so it, too, doesn't necessarily affect other frames. When we look at low-level code such as this one, we should always keep that in mind, and avoid leaking the face definitions to other frames. The trick of making the change take effect on other frames is implemented by higher levels. This is the general background that makes me uneasy to accept the changes which you suggested, because they seem to violate that general principle on a very low level.