On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 01:24:09PM -0600, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote: > > Can we, however, please have colors that are not angry fruit salad? My > > understanding is that sufficiently recent xterm and terminfo is > > capable of handling arbitrary rgb colors, so there's therefore no need > > to make everyone's eyes fall out. > > That's more a palette issue... ANSI gives us 8 colors (16 if you think > that "bold" should indicate another color rather than heavier weight > text). It's difficult to get a combination of > black/red/green/yellow/blue/magenta/white to not look like angry fruit > salad, unless you significantly diverge from the generally accepted look > for those color names.
And you can't diverge from them at all using just the traditional MSDOS-era color escape codes. That's the point. Using tty colors is, inherently, repulsively ugly. I am asking that we not perpetuate this aesthetic crime and, if we're going to deploy this feature, do it in a way that doesn't automatically make people's eyes fall out. (And before anyone says "it adds information! whether it's ugly is irrelevant" -- being that ugly detracts significantly or fatally from the ability to interpret the information.) > If you want to advance to the 256 color with > 6x6x6 color cube, or 24-bit color modes, you may quickly take this > thread into literal 'what color should we paint it' bike shedding. Yes, so someone with graphic design sense needs to put together a scheme, or steal one off the internet. > > Better still would be a scheme that can adjust to the existing text > > and background color of the terminal, but that's probably still hard. > > While an interesting idea, that sounds like a solution waiting for a > problem to me. Why? Does every terminal window out there have the same background color? -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org
