4 ms·

> I think color can make reading faster and easier, it's why syntax highlighting exists. Except you don't know the colour scheme of the terminal: is it a form

> I think color can make reading faster and easier, it's why syntax highlighting exists. Except you don't know the colour scheme of the terminal: is it a form of black text on white background, or white/green text on black background? If you decide to output something as (dark) blue text, how legible will it be? As someone who has a black background, comments shown as dark blue make for difficult reading of many config files with Vim†. † And another thing: when I invoke "vi" I want Vi: I do not want Vim. If I wanted Vim I would have typed in "vim". Having "vi" call Vim is a major pet peeve of mine: have to change that silly default in most distros nowadays.

pie_flavor 3y ago
This is true, and it is also a fact exclusive to dark blue on black, solvable by not using dark blue ever. For any other color, it is easy unless it is the same color as the background.
- kps 3y ago
  > it is also a fact exclusive to dark blue on black, solvable by not using dark blue ever. Try yellow on white. (Dark blue on white is quite usable.)
lolinder 3y ago
This is why I think that every terminal color scheme should just have the right contrast for all colors with the default background. There are 16 colors and these days terminals are pretty much exclusively used for text, so why does your color scheme have a color that is illegible on the default background? I understand that all bets are off if the application starts mixing and matching background colors, but there's no reason why your dark blue can't just be a little lighter. (To be clear, I'm not blaming you for this, a lot of built-in color schemes have problems like this.)
- charcircuit 3y ago
  There are 256^3 colors.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    Okay, well, true color mode is definitely a problem. But that's so obviously disrespectful that I don't think that you're going to get people who are using that on board with this new standard.
bitwize 3y ago
Last time I used Slackware, entering 'vi' still invoked elvis, a sufficiently minimal vi clone. Vim was there too, under 'vim'.
- JdeBP 3y ago
  And FreeBSD and OpenBSD supply nvi as their vi. In contrast, there are plenty of people that push this as a handy default. It's all over the place and sneaks in via all sorts of routes -- very unfortunately for those people who want vi to invoke something that is closer to genuine Joy vi than VIM and NeoVIM are, even in their "compatible" modes. Just one example is the default yashrc that is used by the Watanabe shell: https://github.com/magicant/yash/blob/trunk/share/initialization/common#L131 https://github.com/magicant/yash/blob/trunk/share/initializa... (Yes, this is the default, in the absence of a yashrc file, not the sample yashrc file.)
arp242 3y ago
> As someone who has a black background, comments shown as dark blue make for difficult reading of many config files with Vim. :set background=dark should fix that.

pie_flavor 3y ago

This is true, and it is also a fact exclusive to dark blue on black, solvable by not using dark blue ever. For any other color, it is easy unless it is the same color as the background.

kps 3y ago
> it is also a fact exclusive to dark blue on black, solvable by not using dark blue ever. Try yellow on white. (Dark blue on white is quite usable.)

lolinder 3y ago

This is why I think that every terminal color scheme should just have the right contrast for all colors with the default background. There are 16 colors and these days terminals are pretty much exclusively used for text, so why does your color scheme have a color that is illegible on the default background? I understand that all bets are off if the application starts mixing and matching background colors, but there's no reason why your dark blue can't just be a little lighter. (To be clear, I'm not blaming you for this, a lot of built-in color schemes have problems like this.)

charcircuit 3y ago
There are 256^3 colors.
- lolinder 3y ago
  Okay, well, true color mode is definitely a problem. But that's so obviously disrespectful that I don't think that you're going to get people who are using that on board with this new standard.

bitwize 3y ago

Last time I used Slackware, entering 'vi' still invoked elvis, a sufficiently minimal vi clone. Vim was there too, under 'vim'.

JdeBP 3y ago
And FreeBSD and OpenBSD supply nvi as their vi. In contrast, there are plenty of people that push this as a handy default. It's all over the place and sneaks in via all sorts of routes -- very unfortunately for those people who want vi to invoke something that is closer to genuine Joy vi than VIM and NeoVIM are, even in their "compatible" modes. Just one example is the default yashrc that is used by the Watanabe shell: https://github.com/magicant/yash/blob/trunk/share/initialization/common#L131 https://github.com/magicant/yash/blob/trunk/share/initializa... (Yes, this is the default, in the absence of a yashrc file, not the sample yashrc file.)

arp242 3y ago

> As someone who has a black background, comments shown as dark blue make for difficult reading of many config files with Vim. :set background=dark should fix that.