Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

23325Re: Vim60ap patch: Athena & Motif "Menu" highlight group fix

Expand Messages
  • David Harrison
    Aug 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Bram Moolenaar wrote:

      > David Harrison wrote:

      >
      > Another thing is wheter we want to do it the same way for Athena and Motif.
      > But I thought that fontset support is in the generic library, thus they could
      > both be the same, right?


      Yes. I'll use an "XFontSet" type (from the X11 library). For Motif,
      I'll just create an XmFontList from that, while for Athena there would
      be nothing else to do.



      >>No one has yet complained about the lack of FontSet support in the
      >>menus, so probably no real harm done.
      >>
      >
      > I did get a few requests for it. Don't forget that the people that would like
      > to use this, often have trouble writing English, thus tend to keep their mouth
      > shut.


      *speaking to a large group of people* ... if anyone doesn't understand
      English, please raise your hand. *pauses and notes no raised hands*
      Good! Then everyone speaks English. ;-)



      > It almost looks like we have all the stuff in place to make the switch, or is
      > there still some place where using a fontset will require adding new code?


      Only minor bits will be added, I think.

      >
      > By default the current locale should be used. That's how it has always
      > worked. If possible, we would like to allow setting the encoding with ":lang"
      > and the 'encoding' option, and make the menus work with that. But restricting
      > this to have it only work when Vim is starting up isn't too bad.


      I'll take the first step and we'll go from there...


      > Perhaps what we can do is use a FONTSET_ALWAYS define to add the code for
      > this. At first to see if we run into trouble when implementing it. Then we
      > can enable it by default to let people test it. When we run into too much
      > trouble we can undefine it to fall back to the old code. Does that sound
      > reasonable?


      That sounds very reasonable. I have direction now.

      Thank you,
      David Harrison Jr.
    • Show all 12 messages in this topic