Mailing List Archive
tlug.jp Mailing List tlug archive tlug Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 13:42:26 +0900
- From: Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- References: <20180915052326.rzjg4hrbvirmdg7t@monotonic.cynic.net> <20180915101614.GA29771@wismut>
- User-agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
On 2018-09-15 12:16 +0200 (Sat), Jens John wrote: > * base16-solarflare from this [1] collection.... I'd come across the base16[2] platform in my travels but didn't quite understand how it worked, beyond that it seemed to be arbitrary replacements of the standard 16 (00 through 15) terminal colours. I'm feeling at the moment that such arbitrary replacement, such as what solarized does, doesn't work since most programs out there assume a somewhat-standard palette for those colours. But looking further at the base16-shell[1] scripts, which are setting additional colours 16-21 (I think the 17 in the README is a typo), this base16 thing (which I venture to say is not explained very well for the complete novice) appears to be an attempt to keep a set of basic 16 colours that's compatible to at least some degree with what naive programs are expecting and yet gain a few of the advantages of what solarized and other schemes are attempting to do. It seems, too, that terminal colour schemes for the basic 16 values don't matter much on a 256-colour terminal when using an editor that supports that and is propertly configured; things just go bad there when you have to fall back to 16 colours and you have a sufficiently mismatching combination there, which is precisely what I'm seeing in xterm versus 256-colour urxvt. I wonder if there's a document out there that describes, for folks not already familiar with this, the various tradeoffs with playing around with the 16-color scheme. For example, it seems that "colours" 08-15 are in 16-colour terminals the bold versions of colors 00-07 (i.e., set by sending SGR[3] commands 1;30 (bold;black) for colour 08, which will produce different output (in particular, bold rather than non-bold) from SGR command 38 5 8 for extended colour 08. Looking at it now, I suspect vim is giving me the output I like in a 256-colour terminal simply using extended colours rather than standard 0-7 and bold 0-7 for "8-15" . (Jens, even if you have have nothing further to offer on this, thanks for the tip on base16-shell; that helped enormously.) [1]: https://github.com/chriskempson/base16-shell [2]: https://github.com/chriskempson/base16 [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI_escape_code#SGR cjs -- Curt J. Sampson <cjs@example.com> +81 90 7737 2974 To iterate is human, to recurse divine. - L Peter Deutsch
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- From: Curt Sampson
- References:
- [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- From: Curt Sampson
- Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- From: Jens John
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- Next by Date: Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- Previous by thread: Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- Next by thread: Re: [tlug] Solarized Colour Scheme
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links