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

[FEATURE] override colors of each variant specifically #370

Open
caarlos0 opened this issue Nov 27, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

[FEATURE] override colors of each variant specifically #370

caarlos0 opened this issue Nov 27, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@caarlos0
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

neovim merged DEC private mode 2031 support, which means it can now in theory automatically set background=light/dark.

It would be amazing to use gruvbox like that!

Only problem is that I do have some overrides, e.g.:

local bg0 = "#1b1b1b"
require("gruvbox").setup({
  contrast = "hard",
  overrides = {
    GruvboxBg0 = { fg = bg0 },
    SignColumn = { bg = bg0 },
    GruvboxRedSign = { bg = bg0 },
    GruvboxYellowSign = { bg = bg0 },
    GruvboxGreenSign = { bg = bg0 },
    GruvboxAquaSign = { bg = bg0 },
    GruvboxOrangeSign = { bg = bg0 },
    GruvboxPurpleSign = { bg = bg0 },
    GruvboxBlueSign = { bg = bg0 },
    Normal = { bg = bg0 },
  },
})
vim.cmd("colorscheme gruvbox")

as you can see, these would not look good on the light colorscheme.

Describe the solution you'd like

I only need these overrides because gruvbox.nvim background's color is a bit different than my terminal's gruvbox theme background color.

I also do change other things other then this (e.g. sign columns bg), but I guess these could be solved with Link?

In any case, it would be amazing to be able to override colors for a specific variant of the theme, maybe something like what cappuccin does.

@ellisonleao
Copy link
Owner

hey @caarlos0 thanks for bringing this up. Maybe it's related to #306

@caarlos0
Copy link
Author

hey @caarlos0 thanks for bringing this up. Maybe it's related to #306

seems to me that it would be part of it, yes.

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

2 participants