Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Should selenized color syntax elements exactly like solarized? #74

Open
jan-warchol opened this issue Mar 22, 2020 · 9 comments
Open

Should selenized color syntax elements exactly like solarized? #74

jan-warchol opened this issue Mar 22, 2020 · 9 comments

Comments

@jan-warchol
Copy link
Owner

Selenized builds on top of solarized by improving contrast and hues. What about token coloring choices? Should selenized mimic solarized as closely as possible, or could solarized choices be improved?

My opinion is that some choices in solarized are bad - in particular I dislike green keywords; to me they look ugly and also I think green is not strong enough for keywords:

image

I think that it's better to swap keywords with types:

image

However, some users (e.g. @fladd) prefer to keep original coloring. I can do that if the majority of users think the same. Please give 👍 if you want selenized to be like solarized, or 👎 if you prefer a modified version.

@dngray
Copy link
Contributor

dngray commented Mar 30, 2020

Well with the g:selenized_green_keywords=1 keyword you've achieved making both sets of people happy.

@fladd
Copy link

fladd commented Apr 2, 2020

Could you also update the bw version? This one seems to have entirely different colours at the moment.

@jan-warchol
Copy link
Owner Author

Could you also update the bw version? This one seems to have entirely different colours at the moment.

@fladd Umm, what do you mean? Black/white version is supposed to look different, like this:
image

Or did you mean to add this comment to #76?

@fladd
Copy link

fladd commented Apr 3, 2020

The colours for me are not the same as in the non-bw version. For instance, Python imports are blue all of a sudden, strings are green, functions are pink...
They should have the same colours than in the non-bw version, just with a different background, right?

@jan-warchol
Copy link
Owner Author

The colours for me are not the same as in the non-bw version. For instance, Python imports are blue all of a sudden, strings are green, functions are pink...

Looks like the previous version, before #70 was merged. Are you sure you're using the latest code? Also, note that the directory layout changed in #73 and vim files are now in editors/vim/ rather than just vim/.

They should have the same colours than in the non-bw version, just with a different background, right?

Yes, almost the same. I mean, green will be a very slightly different green, but it still should be green.

@fladd
Copy link

fladd commented Apr 3, 2020

Sorry, something went wrong with updating. Now the colours seem correct.

@rudock1
Copy link

rudock1 commented Jul 16, 2020

Hi Mr Warchoł
I agree that it's better to swap keywords with types as you have shown in your second set of screen shots. In a related way, on this page (https://github.com/jan-warchol/selenized/blob/master/balancing-lightness-of-colors.md) you show a sequence of screen shots using an older version of the 8-color-preview.sh test. My question, however, is about which EDITOR and shell script COLOR THEME that was used to prepare these screen shots. Here, too, the keywords are yellow not green.

I think it is most pleasing and I would love to see my own shell script work expressed with this color theme. Could you please identify these components?
Thanks in advance!
Billy

@patkru
Copy link

patkru commented Oct 2, 2020

@rudock1 I don't think that this issue is the right place for your question, but to me it seems that on the screenshot you linked Jan used vi or vim (hint: sequence of spaces is red) and Selenized Dark theme

@kunthar
Copy link

kunthar commented Nov 22, 2022

Have you seen this?
https://meat.io/oksolar

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants