From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Yuri D'Elia Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Incorrect font weight selected Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 19:08:21 +0100 Message-ID: <87mtkaujbs.fsf@wavexx.thregr.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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25280"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.7.5; emacs 29.0.50 Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 05 19:32:51 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 1n5B5e-0006Pp-O8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 19:32:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40550 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5B5d-0006pV-GY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 13:32:49 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:43282) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5B3B-0003Sf-9o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 13:30:25 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:41c9:1:41f::63] (port=33316 helo=erc.thregr.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5B37-0000dY-4L; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 13:30:15 -0500 Original-Received: from [193.106.183.18] (helo=localhost) by erc.thregr.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) id 1n5B36-001pne-Bi (envelope-from ); Wed, 05 Jan 2022 19:30:12 +0100 In-reply-to: <83bl0q9hz6.fsf@gnu.org> X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2001:41c9:1:41f::63 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2001:41c9:1:41f::63; envelope-from=wavexx@thregr.org; helo=erc.thregr.org X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:284261 Archived-At: On Wed, Jan 05 2022, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I believe you. But the problem is that there are so many different > use patterns with fonts and faces that it is impossible to test all > the consequences in such a short time, certainly by a single > individual. Absolutely. > Then maybe I didn't realize what problem are you trying to solve. > Does the problem happen only with new frames? At least Sean Whitton > said in this thread that his problems caused by 1b2511f are not with > new frames, AFAIU. Before guessing too much, can we get some comments from Sean and Dmitry? Any change either can comment on the patch and/or behavior? I think this was simply confounded by the fact that starting with --daemon changes the startup semantics and immediately results in a new graphical frame being created. Took me a while to notice/debug the exact behavior, and the possibilities setting up the default faces during startup are numerous. > 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. Maybe the user interface to do that is odd. I totally agree that looking at the big picture, it's... a mess. I wrote some toughs on how this plays with themes and customize in "custom-theme-set-faces/face inheritance and delayed face initialization".