Re: [PATCH] About the :distant-foreground face attribute

[Daniel Colascione]

On 01/15/2014 01:12 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:03:29 -0800
> > From: Daniel Colascione <address@hidden>
> > CC: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
> >   address@hidden
> >
> > > It has been a long tradition of Emacs not to generalize before there's
> > > a clear and present need to.
> >
> > Sure. The problem with :adjust-colors or some other specific name,
> > though, is what happens to ordering if we introduce other kinds of
> > filters. If we have :adjust-colors and some hypothetical :adjust-foo,
> > the order in which the adjustments are made becomes unclear.
>
> Again, why should we be bothered by hypothetical attributes?  Let's
> bother about them when they become a reality, or at least come close.

We're not bothering with them now. We're making sure we won't *be* 
bothered by them later.

> > Also, can we please include "post-" in the name of the attribute? I want
> > to emphasize that the filtering happens *after* face merging.
>
> Is it wise to expose implementation details in the interfaces?

Generally no, but I don't see how you can avoid it. Whether the 
filtering happens after face composition or face-by-face during 
attribute merging affects the values the filter function sees. It's part 
of the interface.