[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: bad default faces now
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
RE: bad default faces now |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Mar 2010 00:35:18 -0700 |
> > The default faces were changed after Emacs 23.1, and the
> > result is worse, IMO.
> >
> > I don't care for myself, since I don't use the default
> > faces, but see the attached screenshot. The faces for
> > the comment, the variable name, and the doc
> > string are all about the same.
> >
> > In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
> > of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
> > Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
> > configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
>
> I think the new face in 23.1 is very clear, at least better
> than default face in 22.x. Can you attach the face you use
> for comparison?
I don't understand what you're saying or what you're asking.
The faces in Emacs 23.1 are OK. And as far as I can see they are the same as in
Emacs 22.3.
It is the faces in the pretest I cited that are worse.
I'm not crazy about the default faces in Emacs 22 or 23.1 either. I agree with
the motivation behind the change that was made after 23.1: the doc-string text
is too pale.
All I'm saying is that the current default has faces that are commonly used
together that are too similar: similar in hue, saturation, and brightness.
Both the variable-name face and the doc-string face were apparently moved closer
to the comment face. The variable-name face and the comment face are nearly
indistinguisable now, and all three are very close.
Beyond pointing this out, I really don't care much. If no one else thinks this
is bad, then ignore.