GNU bug report logs - #37774
27.0.50; new :extend attribute broke visuals of all themes and other packages

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Andrey Orst <andreyorst <at> gmail.com>

Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 07:32:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 27.0.50

Done: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Andrey Orst <andreyorst <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Ergus <spacibba <at> aol.com>, 37774 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#37774: 27.0.50; new :extend attribute broke visuals of all themes and other packages
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 11:12:44 +0300
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
these faces are forming visual interface, e.g. hunks in Magit are
rectangular regions with background color for entire width of the window
that can be folded. Code blocks in org mode are, ahem, blocks. Now those
blocks doesn't have anything like block visually.

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 10:53 Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Andrey Orst <andreyorst <at> gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 10:00:38 +0300
> >
> > Somewhat last checkout from master brought the change of face
> > attributes, adding new `:extend` attribute, which make all themes, and
> > packages like Magit display weirdly.  By this I mean that before the
> > change, some faces were set up to extend highlighting beyond EOL, but
> > now all of those faces are not doing this.  I've first reported this to
> > the theme package I'm using:
> > https://github.com/hlissner/emacs-doom-themes/issues/342 but I think
> > that this should be handled by emacs itself, because if not it will
> > result in the duplicated or extra code in themes fro different Emacs
> > versions.  This reddit post has some screenshots of what I mean:
> >
> https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/diahh1/emacs_27_update_changed_how_highlighted_lines/
>
> The screenshots you posted don't clearly explain the problem.  Some of
> them seem actually identical before and after the change, and with
> others I don't think I see the problem.
>
> So please explain what exactly is incorrect or "weird" in the visual
> appearance after the change.  Specifically, why the faces in question
> need to be extended past EOL?
>
> Thanks.
>
[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

This bug report was last modified 5 years and 161 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.