Re: bad default faces now

[Zhu, Shenli]

On 03/22/2010 03:35 PM, Drew Adams wrote:
> > > 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.
>    
Me too, and sorry for my poor English :)
> 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.
>    
What I mean is maybe you have a better face set?
> 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.
>
>