Vim mapping colours to highlight groups

[fladd]

The current mapping from the colours to their highlight groups does not seem to be optimal. I would have expected Selenized to look very similar to Solarized (just with better contrast and slightly different shades of the colours), but the syntax colours are completely shuffled around.

(left: Solarized8, right: Selenized)

Also, something weird is going on with the status line.

[jan-warchol]

Hello @fladd,

this opens a very interesting topic. To be honest, I don't particularly like Solarized's choice of token-color mappings (in particular I think using green for keywords is a bad choice). However, I'm not completely satisfied with current selenized coloring and I indeed intend to change it at least a bit.

There is also the issue with number of colors available: solarized uses 8 "accent" colors, but it requires an ugly hack that selenized aims to avoid. So, full solarized compatibility is impossible (at least with coloring based on terminal's ANSI codes).

My question is: is having selenized mimic solarized's syntax coloring a must-have for you (and any other people)? Would you be okay with some kind of middle ground?

(PS I'm not talking about the status line, that one is definitely a bug.)

[jan-warchol]

PS could you send me the source used to make the screenshots? I'm surprised that class name was colored green, it's supposed to be pink. I'd like to inspect it.

[fladd]

@jan-warchol: Thanks for the quick response.

I think Solarized's colour mappings are generally pretty well chosen. Something approaching this at least should be welcome by most people I think.

I map Python class names to Type in my .vimrc, because by default, Vim does not dissociate between class names and function names. I think this is a pretty common thing to do. Unfortunately, in Selenized, Type has the same colour as strings.

[jan-warchol]

@jan-warchol: Thanks for the quick response.

I think Solarized's colour mappings are generally pretty well chosen. Something approaching this at least should be welcome by most people I think.

Hmm. I'm close to being convinced. Would you be able to help me with testing?

Also, @dngray, what do you think? Have you started any work on #67?

I map Python class names to Type in my .vimrc, because by default, Vim does not dissociate between class names and function names. I think this is a pretty common thing to do. Unfortunately, in Selenized, Type has the same colour as strings.

Ah, ok. Thanks for explaining.

[fladd]

Hmm. I'm close to being convinced. Would you be able to help me with testing?

Sure.

[dngray]

Also, @dngray, what do you think? Have you started any work on #67?

No I have not yet, been meaning to get to it this week along with :set spell highlights.

[jan-warchol]

Okay, so I suggest the following plan:

• I'll rework highlighting of syntax groups to be more like solarized
• I like current syntax highlighting so I'll use it as a basis for another theme, most probably full-color version of limestone (I need to add some screenshots there...)
• unstyled elements mentioned in Vim: style remaining default groups #67 are almost exclusively interface elements, so I'll leave them to @dngray
• we'll need some code samples for testing. I'll setup a repo and I count on @fladd's help here :-)

[jan-warchol]

@fladd Here's the repo with samples for testing; feel free to comment or submit your own samples. https://github.com/jan-warchol/highlighting-code-samples

[dngray]

unstyled elements mentioned in #67 are almost exclusively interface elements, so I'll leave them to @dngray

I'll get on that this week.

I like current syntax highlighting so I'll use it as a basis for another theme, most probably full-color version of limestone (I need to add some screenshots there...)

I very much like the DESIGN.md for limestone and would be keen to keep that methodology for selenized.

[jan-warchol]

Closed via #70, but part of the discussion is continued in #74.