Re: Note on e65c307 breaks font-height

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 11:48:10 +0200
> From: martin rudalics <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
> 
>  > IOW, the font selection code was not designed to support what you'd
>  > like, not in general.  That is why I strongly recommend to just state
>  > a specific font of your liking, and move on.
> 
> What I did (in the previous century, IIRC) was to select the procedure
> that I then considered best supported by the customization interface.
> Can you point me to a similar interface for the step you propose?  IOW,
> I still think that mine is the way a newbie would use.

I don't understand why we are talking about customization interfaces.
I thought the problem was that requesting a font by specifying some of
its attributes doesn't work.  Now I'm confused: what problem is at
hand?

>  >   -- Function: face-attribute face attribute &optional frame inherit
>  >       This function returns the value of the ATTRIBUTE attribute for FACE
>  >       on FRAME.
>  >
>  > And all the other functions in that node accept the FRAME argument.
> 
> IIUC none of these bear any relation to the customization interface.

"M-x customize-face" changes the face definitions on all frames, but
you can invoke set-face-attribute with a specific frame to change the
face only on that frame.

> And I still don't see where the customization framework allows or
> suggests to specifiy a face for a frame or for "any" frame.

I don't think it does.

In any case, it looks like a simple question of mine led us aside for
no good reason.  Whether faces are or aren't per frame has nothing to
do with the problem at hand.