BUG-#+ Fontification

BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Hi Carsten,

The following commit breaks fontification for #+ lines at the top of org
files.

bernt@gollum:~/git/org-mode$ git bisect good
476493d3b300b8dc379ea7e42c974461d6f3dfb5 is first bad commit
commit 476493d3b300b8dc379ea7e42c974461d6f3dfb5
Author: Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat May 23 22:58:38 2009 +0200

    Fontification: Better treatment of #+ lines and blocks
    
    The content of blocks like #+begin_example will be marked with a
    separate face.  That same face is also used for single lines
    introducing text for specific backends.

:040000 040000 e2e5414b39664d3a24ff4365d924e1925a1e9174 91dcbde55b4ee8a92c4222f556a0ca3dd5e139cb M	lisp


This commit and everything after shows #+STARTUP: and other lines in
black.  They were red before that.

Is the face definition missing maybe?  I forget how to check what face
is active in Emacs for a specific character - I need to write that down
the next time I relearn it :)

-Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Carsten Dominik]

On May 28, 2009, at 10:28 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:

> Hi Carsten,
>
> The following commit breaks fontification for #+ lines at the top of  
> org
> files.
>
> bernt@gollum:~/git/org-mode$ git bisect good
> 476493d3b300b8dc379ea7e42c974461d6f3dfb5 is first bad commit
> commit 476493d3b300b8dc379ea7e42c974461d6f3dfb5
> Author: Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>
> Date:   Sat May 23 22:58:38 2009 +0200
>
>    Fontification: Better treatment of #+ lines and blocks
>
>    The content of blocks like #+begin_example will be marked with a
>    separate face.  That same face is also used for single lines
>    introducing text for specific backends.
>
> :040000 040000 e2e5414b39664d3a24ff4365d924e1925a1e9174  
> 91dcbde55b4ee8a92c4222f556a0ca3dd5e139cb M	lisp
>
>
> This commit and everything after shows #+STARTUP: and other lines in
> black.  They were red before that.
>
> Is the face definition missing maybe?  I forget how to check what face
> is active in Emacs for a specific character - I need to write that  
> down
> the next time I relearn it :)

C-u C-x =

The face should be `org-meta-line' and is defined in org-faces.

>
> -Bernt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:

> On May 28, 2009, at 10:28 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:
>
>> Is the face definition missing maybe?  I forget how to check what face
>> is active in Emacs for a specific character - I need to write that
>> down
>> the next time I relearn it :)
>
> C-u C-x =
>
> The face should be `org-meta-line' and is defined in org-faces.

Thanks!  It is org-meta-line ... but I don't have an org-faces anywhere
(function or variable).

-Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes:

> Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On May 28, 2009, at 10:28 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:
>>
>>> Is the face definition missing maybe?  I forget how to check what face
>>> is active in Emacs for a specific character - I need to write that
>>> down
>>> the next time I relearn it :)
>>
>> C-u C-x =
>>
>> The face should be `org-meta-line' and is defined in org-faces.
>
> Thanks!  It is org-meta-line ... but I don't have an org-faces anywhere
> (function or variable).

Okay I should spend 2 more seconds before replying...

org-faces.el

Face: org-meta-line (sample) (customize this face)
Documentation: Face for meta lines startin with "#+".
Defined in `org-faces.el'.

         Family: unspecified
          Width: unspecified
         Height: unspecified
         Weight: unspecified
          Slant: unspecified
     Foreground: unspecified
     Background: unspecified
      Underline: unspecified
       Overline: unspecified
 Strike-through: unspecified
            Box: unspecified
        Inverse: unspecified
        Stipple: unspecified
Font or fontset: unspecified
        Inherit: unspecified

[back]

So that would probably be why it's all black for me :)

-Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes:

> Face: org-meta-line (sample) (customize this face)
> Documentation: Face for meta lines startin with "#+".
> Defined in `org-faces.el'.
>
>          Family: unspecified
>           Width: unspecified
>          Height: unspecified
>          Weight: unspecified
>           Slant: unspecified
>      Foreground: unspecified
>      Background: unspecified
>       Underline: unspecified
>        Overline: unspecified
>  Strike-through: unspecified
>             Box: unspecified
>         Inverse: unspecified
>         Stipple: unspecified
> Font or fontset: unspecified
>         Inherit: unspecified
>
> [back]
>
> So that would probably be why it's all black for me :)

So to 'fix' this issue I customized the face and set Foreground to
'Firebrick' (red) which I think is what it used to look like.  Should
this face not have some default colouring defined? or are we supposed to
customize it.  That just jumped out at me as different from the default
behaviour we used to have -- and is what prompted this thread.

Sorry if I'm being a nuisance :)

-Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Nick Dokos]

Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrote:

> Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes:
> 
> > Face: org-meta-line (sample) (customize this face)
> > Documentation: Face for meta lines startin with "#+".
> > Defined in `org-faces.el'.
> >
> >          Family: unspecified
> >           Width: unspecified
> >          Height: unspecified
> >          Weight: unspecified
> >           Slant: unspecified
> >      Foreground: unspecified
> >      Background: unspecified
> >       Underline: unspecified
> >        Overline: unspecified
> >  Strike-through: unspecified
> >             Box: unspecified
> >         Inverse: unspecified
> >         Stipple: unspecified
> > Font or fontset: unspecified
> >         Inherit: unspecified
> >
> > [back]
> >
> > So that would probably be why it's all black for me :)
> 
> So to 'fix' this issue I customized the face and set Foreground to
> 'Firebrick' (red) which I think is what it used to look like.  Should
> this face not have some default colouring defined? or are we supposed to
> customize it.  That just jumped out at me as different from the default
> behaviour we used to have -- and is what prompted this thread.
> 

It *is* initialized:

,----
| (defface org-meta-line
|   (org-compatible-face 'font-lock-comment-face nil)   <--------
|   "Face for meta lines startin with \"#+\"."
|   :group 'org-faces
|   :version "22.1")
`----

It should look like a comment - but you may have defined the face
somehow and the macrology might be incapable of redefining it. Have you
tried restarting emacs?

Nick

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:

> Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrote:
>
>> Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes:
>> 
>> > Face: org-meta-line (sample) (customize this face)
>> > Documentation: Face for meta lines startin with "#+".
>> > Defined in `org-faces.el'.
>> >
>> >          Family: unspecified
>> >           Width: unspecified
>> >          Height: unspecified
>> >          Weight: unspecified
>> >           Slant: unspecified
>> >      Foreground: unspecified
>> >      Background: unspecified
>> >       Underline: unspecified
>> >        Overline: unspecified
>> >  Strike-through: unspecified
>> >             Box: unspecified
>> >         Inverse: unspecified
>> >         Stipple: unspecified
>> > Font or fontset: unspecified
>> >         Inherit: unspecified
>> >
>> > [back]
>> >
>> > So that would probably be why it's all black for me :)
>> 
>> So to 'fix' this issue I customized the face and set Foreground to
>> 'Firebrick' (red) which I think is what it used to look like.  Should
>> this face not have some default colouring defined? or are we supposed to
>> customize it.  That just jumped out at me as different from the default
>> behaviour we used to have -- and is what prompted this thread.
>> 
>
> It *is* initialized:
>
> ,----
> | (defface org-meta-line
> |   (org-compatible-face 'font-lock-comment-face nil)   <--------
> |   "Face for meta lines startin with \"#+\"."
> |   :group 'org-faces
> |   :version "22.1")
> `----
>
> It should look like a comment - but you may have defined the face
> somehow and the macrology might be incapable of redefining it. Have you
> tried restarting emacs?

Yes - I started a minimal emacs session to isolate the commit where it
turns black.

-Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:

> It *is* initialized:
>
> ,----
> | (defface org-meta-line
> |   (org-compatible-face 'font-lock-comment-face nil)   <--------
> |   "Face for meta lines startin with \"#+\"."
> |   :group 'org-faces
> |   :version "22.1")
> `----
>
> It should look like a comment - but you may have defined the face
> somehow and the macrology might be incapable of redefining it. Have you
> tried restarting emacs?

Btw this is the first time I've every messed with face colouring in
emacs.  I've always just used the default settings before since they
were fine.

-Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Nick Dokos]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> wrote:

> Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrote:
> 
> > Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:
> > 
> > > Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrote:
> > >
> ...
> > >> 
> > >> So to 'fix' this issue I customized the face and set Foreground to
> > >> 'Firebrick' (red) which I think is what it used to look like.  Should
> > >> this face not have some default colouring defined? or are we supposed to
> > >> customize it.  That just jumped out at me as different from the default
> > >> behaviour we used to have -- and is what prompted this thread.
> > >> 
> > >
> > > It *is* initialized:
> > >
> > > ,----
> > > | (defface org-meta-line
> > > |   (org-compatible-face 'font-lock-comment-face nil)   <--------
> > > |   "Face for meta lines startin with \"#+\"."
> > > |   :group 'org-faces
> > > |   :version "22.1")
> > > `----
> > >
> > > It should look like a comment - but you may have defined the face
> > > somehow and the macrology might be incapable of redefining it. Have you
> > > tried restarting emacs?
> > 
> > Yes - I started a minimal emacs session to isolate the commit where it
> > turns black.
> 
> There seems to be an initialization problem of some sort: in my
> currently running session I evaluate the following two forms and get the
> results shown:
> 
> ,----
> | (get 'org-meta-line 'face-defface-spec)
> | ((t :inherit font-lock-comment-face))
> | 
> | (symbol-plist 'org-meta-line)
> | (face 102 face-defface-spec ((t :inherit font-lock-comment-face))
> |           face-documentation "Face for meta lines startin with \"#+\"." custom-version "22.1")
> `----
> 
> This instance of emacs was created by the Gnome session manager. If I
> start another instance by clicking on the Emacs icon/menu item/etc. I
> get the same behavior.
> 
> But if I open an xterm (or start a shell in emacs) and start another
> instance from the command line, I get the following:
> 
> ,----
> | (get 'org-meta-line 'face-defface-spec)
> | nil
> | 
> | (symbol-plist 'org-meta-line)
> | (face 101 face-defface-spec nil 
> |           face-documentation "Face for meta lines startin with \"#+\"." custom-version "22.1")
> `----
> 
> I don't know what causes this difference in behavior.
> 

Well, duh: because of my PATH, I was getting emacs 22 from the command line,
but  emacs 23 from the panel/menu - no wonder there is a difference.

OTOH, this was stupidity with a purpose :-) The upshot is that
org-compatible-face does not deal with emacs 22 gracefully, since the
first two clauses of the cond fail there and so it takes the default
branch; but since specs is nil in the call, the function returns
nil.

Bernt, you are on emacs 22, correct?

One of the emacs-major-version vs. 22 comparisons should probably
include equality (from the description, I suspect the first one):

,----
| (defun org-compatible-face (inherits specs)
|   "Make a compatible face specification.
| If INHERITS is an existing face and if the Emacs version supports it,
| just inherit the face.  If not, use SPECS to define the face.
| XEmacs and Emacs 21 do not know about the `min-colors' attribute.
| For them we convert a (min-colors 8) entry to a `tty' entry and move it
| to the top of the list.  The `min-colors' attribute will be removed from
| any other entries, and any resulting duplicates will be removed entirely."
|   (cond
|    ((and inherits (facep inherits)
| 	 (not (featurep 'xemacs)) (> emacs-major-version 22))    
|                                ; ^
|                                ; ^--- this should probably be >=                        
|
|     ;; In Emacs 23, we use inheritance where possible.
|     ;; We only do this in Emacs 23, because only there the outline
|     ;; faces have been changed to the original org-mode-level-faces.
|     (list (list t :inherit inherits)))
|    ((or (featurep 'xemacs) (< emacs-major-version 22))
|     ;; These do not understand the `min-colors' attribute.
|     (let (r e a)
|       (while (setq e (pop specs))
| 	(cond
| 	 ((memq (car e) '(t default)) (push e r))
| 	 ((setq a (member '(min-colors 8) (car e)))
| 	  (nconc r (list (cons (cons '(type tty) (delq (car a) (car e)))
| 			       (cdr e)))))
| 	 ((setq a (assq 'min-colors (car e)))
| 	  (setq e (cons (delq a (car e)) (cdr e)))
| 	  (or (assoc (car e) r) (push e r)))
| 	 (t (or (assoc (car e) r) (push e r)))))
|       (nreverse r)))
|    (t specs)))
`----

Thanks,
Nick

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Carsten Dominik]

On May 29, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Nick Dokos wrote:
> Well, duh: because of my PATH, I was getting emacs 22 from the  
> command line,
> but  emacs 23 from the panel/menu - no wonder there is a difference.
>
> OTOH, this was stupidity with a purpose :-) The upshot is that
> org-compatible-face does not deal with emacs 22 gracefully, since the
> first two clauses of the cond fail there and so it takes the default
> branch; but since specs is nil in the call, the function returns
> nil.


Hi Nick,

thank you once again for the fast and excellent analysis of this
bug - this might have taken me a lot of time to figure out.

I have pushed a fix for this problem that at least does help on
Emacs 22 - it will not work correctly under XEmacs.  There will
be a fix for XEmacs as well, but I need to think more about how
to adress this.

Thanks.

- Carsten

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:

>
> Well, duh: because of my PATH, I was getting emacs 22 from the command line,
> but  emacs 23 from the panel/menu - no wonder there is a difference.
>
> OTOH, this was stupidity with a purpose :-) The upshot is that
> org-compatible-face does not deal with emacs 22 gracefully, since the
> first two clauses of the cond fail there and so it takes the default
> branch; but since specs is nil in the call, the function returns
> nil.
>
> Bernt, you are on emacs 22, correct?
>

Yes I'm on emacs 22 (Debian)

GNU Emacs 22.2.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu, X toolkit, Xaw3d scroll bars) of 2008-11-09 on raven, modified by Debian

Thanks for figuring this out :)

-Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Bernt Hansen]

Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Nick,
>
> thank you once again for the fast and excellent analysis of this
> bug - this might have taken me a lot of time to figure out.
>
> I have pushed a fix for this problem that at least does help on
> Emacs 22 - it will not work correctly under XEmacs.  There will
> be a fix for XEmacs as well, but I need to think more about how
> to adress this.
>
> Thanks.

This both.  This fixes the problem I was seeing.  I've removed my face
customization again and I'm back to the default settings.

Regards,
Bernt

Re: BUG-#+ Fontification

[Nick Dokos]

Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:

> thank you once again for the fast and excellent analysis of this
> bug - this might have taken me a lot of time to figure out.
> 

Glad to help.

Nick