Re: tooltip frame uses (class mono) when processing defface specs

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

> It looks plausible, but it has a drawback that it makes tooltip
> frames work one way, while ordinary frames work a different way.
> That is added complexity.
>
> Can you investigate how things happen for ordinary frames, and then
> see why they fail to happen the same way for tooltip frames?  That
> might show the way to write a fix that would cause both kinds of
> frames to be handled the same way.

It seems (to me) that for ordinary frames, more happens in Lisp,
whereas with tooltip frames, for whatever reason, more happens in C.
So it's probably not too simple to unify normal and tooltip frames in
this regard.

Looks to me as if for ordinary frames, x-create-frame-with-faces adds
the display-type frame parameter, when it calls
frame-set-background-mode (before going on to call
face-set-after-frame-default).