Re: face at point

[Oliver Scholz <alkibiades@gmx.de>]

Tim Cross <tcross@nospam.une.edu.au> writes:
[...]
> All I really wanted to know was "Which is the best/most
> appropriate/accepted way of distinguishing between emacs running on a
> tty, in its own X frame and within an X term so that I can set my
> colours accordingly. 
[...]

The reason to use a check for specific display capabilities with the
`display-.*-p' functions is, that Emacs' capabilities on different
displays/operating systems may change in the future as well as the
operating systems/displays themselves. Even the distinction between a
tty and a graphical display may become more and more blurred. An xterm
may already display 256 colours, why not a future Linux console, too?
Why not real face attributes like bold and italic on a future console?
Emacs 20 did not display colours on a Linux console, for example, but
Emacs 21 does. Or the other way around: Emacs 21.2 does not display
images on MS Windows, although this is a graphical display. But Emacs
21.4 will do.

When you check for display capabilities as needed, you play safe. You
don't have to change your package or your .emacs according to the
display capabilities du jour. Therefore it is depreciated to check for
a specific display or operating system via `window-system' or some
such. In other words: there is no "appropriate/accepted way" to do
this.

    Oliver
-- 
30 Brumaire an 211 de la Révolution
Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité!