Duncan wrote: > Jim Ramsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted > [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 16 > Jun 2008 08:34:01 -0400: > >> Well, this is true and it isn't... In the case of: >> >> ewarn line one >> eblank >> ewarn line two >> >> Obviously it would be the same as ewarn. However, what about here: >> >> ewarn line one >> eblank >> elog line two >> eblank >> einfo line three
Yes, this is a "tricky" case. In the case where the previous and next output lines differ like this, a grey "*" could be used, or perhaps a green one. However, read more below on my response to Duncan. > Here's a novel idea, let blank lines be /real/ blank lines! =8^) Duncan, your point is well-taken. Taking that idea one step further, how about using a "neutral" color for the "*" when "eblank" is used. For example, a medium grey. This would avoid needing logic to guess the correct color, and it would nicely integrate with the rest of the visual flow/look of the output. Although I was originally imagining a context-based color picker, this may be, indeed (as some have pointed out) overkill. The actual issue has mostly to do with conditionals like in the example I gave a while back (in which the blank lines need to be within the conditionals to avoid bunching up of blank lines when the conditionals are false). Currently, I tend to color the "*" the same as the preceding lines (I have no choice bu to pick some color), but this doesn't really look right, depending on how the conditionals play out. I am leaning more and more toward the idea of a neutral color for eblanks, as this would indeed be trivial to code and it would make output make more sense, especially for conditionals, but for other cases as well. -Joe -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list