bug#45264: closed (26.3; `face-remap-set-base' seems to be bugged)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sat, 19 Dec 2020 20:58:02 +0200
with message-id <83a6u9tyh1.fsf@gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#45264: 26.3; `face-remap-set-base' seems to be bugged
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #45264,
regarding 26.3; `face-remap-set-base' seems to be bugged
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
45264: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=45264
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> 26.3; `face-remap-set-base' seems to be bugged
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Tue, 15 Dec 2020 16:31:31 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>
>
> See https://emacs.stackexchange.com/a/62301/105
>
> (defface foo '((t (:background "red"))) "...")
>
> (face-remap-set-base 'font-lock-keyword-face 'foo)
>
> The &rest arg SPECS is `(foo)', which is, as required, a list of
> (one) face.
>
> But the code actually expects `foo' itself to be a list.  It raises
> an error, because it sets SPECS to just `foo' and then tries to
> take the car of it.
>
> (while (and (consp specs)
>             (not (null (car specs)))
>             (null (cdr specs)))
>   (setq specs (car specs))) ; <=========
>
> (if (or (null specs)
>     (and (eq (car specs) face) ; <=========
>          (null (cdr specs))))
>
> Is there a doc bug (both manual and doc string)?  Or is there a code
> bug?  Or am I missing something?
>
>
> In GNU Emacs 26.3 (build 1, x86_64-w64-mingw32)
>  of 2019-08-29
> Repository revision: 96dd0196c28bc36779584e47fffcca433c9309cd
> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 10.0.18362
> Configured using:
>  `configure --without-dbus --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
>  --without-compress-install 'CFLAGS=-O2 -static -g3''
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#45264: 26.3; `face-remap-set-base' seems to be bugged
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sat, 19 Dec 2020 20:58:02 +0200
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 10:32:16 -0800 (PST)
> > From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> > Cc: 45264@debbugs.gnu.org
> > 
> > The confusion is from the doc not saying explicitly
> > that each element of SPECS is a face spec, and NOT a
> > face.
>
> SPECS has no "elements".  SPECS stands for arguments to the function
> beyond the 1st arg FACE.  Each such argument is either a face name or
> a list of attribute/value pairs.
>
> I changed the doc string to be more clear about that.
>
> > 2. "why you thought the argument could be a list of
> > one or more faces?"
> > 
> > The doc string explicitly says that elements of
> > SPECS can be face names:
> > 
> >   Each list element should be either a face name or...
>
> That's after it says that you should consider SPECS as "forming" a
> list of elements.
>
>
> --- End Message ---