Subject: bug#73862: [PATCH] Add `header-line-active` and `header-line-inactive` faces.

From: Aaron Jensen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 14:59:30 -0500

On Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 11:19 AM, Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> wrote:

> From: Aaron Jensen <[email-masked]>
> Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 14:06:35 -0500
> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
> [email-masked]
>
> Would it make sense to extend the face doc strings that should not use
> inheritance to indicate that?
>
> I'm not sure. Inheritance does work for the basic faces, it's just that
> face-remapping doesn't get passed by inheritance.
>

Yeah, I guess that'd be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I retract.

Another possibility would be to issue a warning when attempting to remap
mode-line or header-line. The user would at least see that what they're
doing is fraught. I believe this would require reconciling the terminal vs
GUI difference for mode-line you mentioned earlier. This would still be
adding specialization in a generalized place, and arguably that's a worse
place to do it than where you added it in your patch, so feel free to
disregard that idea.

Thanks,

Aaron