GNU bug report logs -
#37774
27.0.50; new :extend attribute broke visuals of all themes and other packages
Previous Next
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
> Cc: 37774 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, juri <at> linkov.net
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
> Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 03:06:05 +0200
>
> > Well, we will have to document this exemption prominently, then.
>
> I suppose so. Though I wouldn't consider it too important to most users,
It's important to developers of Lisp programs that manipulate faces.
> > Is the patch likely to change any behavior except that of
> > custom-theme-set-faces?
>
> Only the behavior of other its callers (direct and indirect). :-)
>
> Such as enable-theme, face-set-after-frame-default,
> frame-set-background-mode and face-spec-set. I'm pretty sure all of
> these should behave consistently WRT this change.
>
> >> I think the purpose of face-spec-recalc is clear enough. So I'd like to
> >> see at least one of those "unintended consequences".
> >
> > Let's try to avoid such consequences from the get-go, okay?
>
> I'm "avoiding such consequences" by trying to make sure the change is in
> the correct function and that it makes sense within the context.
I meant to avoid such consequences by making sure those other callers
can never trigger this new processing of :extend. Can we please do
that? That will go a long way towards my agreement to have this code
in Emacs 27.
> >>>> + (when (and theme-face-applied (not themed-extend-attr))
> >>>> + (let ((extend-p (plist-get default-attrs :extend)))
> >>>> + (and extend-p (face-spec-set-2 face frame '(:extend t)))))
> >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>> I think this should be extend-p instead, because the face's default
> >>> spec could legitimately say ":extend nil". Right?
> >>
> >> But that's the default value of that attribute.
> >
> > No, the default is 'unspecified', which is different from nil, when
> > merging with a face that specifies :extend, and when inheriting. A
> > theme that says ':extend nil' should override the default spec, unlike
> > 'unspecified'.
>
> This distinction is handled in the second hunk of the patch where
> themed-extend-attr is calculated. If this attribute is not themed, there
> is no difference between nil and 'unspecified' (in the default spec).
The use case I had in mind is this:
. the theme doesn't specify :extend
. the default spec for a face specifies ':extend nil'
In this case, after applying the theme, the face should have
':extend nil', implicitly "inherited" from the default spec. Do you
agree?
> Finally, the value 'unspecified' seems impossible to get from the
> attributes list this way. plist-get will simply return nil.
Exactly. And when a face does specify a nil value for :extend, then
plist will return the list '(:extend nil), which is non-nil.
> That said, I think I've found one valid scenario where this patch will
> do wrong: if the themed spec includes an :inherit directive, and the
> inherited face specifies (:extend nil). The current patch would
> inevitably ignore it and override with the value from the default spec.
Once again, I think this part:
> + (when (and theme-face-applied
> + (eq 'unspecified (face-attribute face :extend frame t)))
> + (let ((extend-p (plist-get default-attrs :extend)))
> + (and extend-p (face-spec-set-2 face frame '(:extend t)))))
^^^^^^^^^^^^
isn't right, because it seems to say that when the default face says
':extend nil', the face after applying a theme will have ':extend t',
which isn't TRT, IMO.
Thanks.
This bug report was last modified 5 years and 162 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.