Re: Font-lock colors

[Jason Rumney]

Gerd Moellmann <address@hidden> writes:

> With everything set to defaults, I think current font-lock faces are
> very sub-optimal, to the point that some text is hardly readable on my
> display (examples: include-directives in C text, variable names,
> built-ins).  Something has to happen---what about the faces below?
> 
>  '(font-lock-builtin-face ((t (:weight bold :slant normal))))
>  '(font-lock-comment-face ((((class color)) (:slant oblique :foreground 
> "Brown"))))
>  '(font-lock-constant-face ((((class color)) (:foreground "darkblue"))))
>  '(font-lock-function-name-face ((((class color)) (:foreground "DarkBlue"))))
>  '(font-lock-keyword-face ((t (:weight bold :slant normal))))
>  '(font-lock-string-face ((((class color)) (:foreground "DarkGreen"))))
>  '(font-lock-variable-name-face ((((class color)) (:foreground "DarkBlue"))))

Personally I prefer the current defaults (probably a matter of what
I'm used to). In particular I do not like the use of bold as the only
distinguishing feature of font-lock-builtin-face (I deliberately choose fonts 
without bold and italic variations, as they look awful at the small
font sizes I work with) and there is no distinction between a
constant, a variable-name and function-name in your suggested scheme,
nor between a builtin and keyword (although I am not sure what the
syntactic distinction is there myself).


-- 
Jason Rumney <address@hidden>