Is there a reason you use
'((default :inherit font-lock-warning-face)
(((supports :underline t)) :underline t))
rather than
'((default :inherit font-lock-warning-face)
(t :underline t))
after all, if it's not supported the setting is harmless.
> + (defface compilation-error-file-name
> + '((default :inherit font-lock-warning-face)
> + (((supports :underline t)) :underline t))
> + "Face for displaying file names in compilation errors."
> + :group 'font-lock-highlighting-faces
> + :version "22.1")
Is there a reason you use
> rather than
>'((default :inherit font-lock-warning-face)
> (t :underline t))
Of course that should be
'((t :inherit font-lock-warning-face :underline t))
-- Stefan
___
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/
Here's a patch to make compile.el underline the file names and line
numbers and column numbers. Please try this and tell me what you
think.
There is surely a more elegant way to do this which does not involve
making so many new faces; someone who knows better how to set up
font-lock-keywords, mig
