Equal weight between focussed and unfocussed panes


#1

Perhaps I’ve missed something really obvious, but it’s something that I’m struggling to find an answer to online.

I’m a heavy user of multiple panes when coding, especially when I’m referring to one while working in the other. However, no matter what theme I’m using (some are worse for this than others) the panes I’m not using are dimmed and pretty much useless to me.

Is there a setting or a specific LESS class attribute I can change to make this not be the case?

This is the main reason I’m still clinging onto Sublime and I’d really like to make the full shift to Atom.

Cheers


#2

I’ve never seen that happen. Are you sure it’s not a package you have installed, rather than a theme, that messes this up? Does it happen when you start Atom in safe mode with atom --safe? That will load Atom without any community packages & themes, so it’s a great way to check if some behaviour is causes a community package or not.


#3

I’ve only got the core modules installed, although atom --safe stopped it from happening, it seems that it’s the UI theme seti-ui that’s doing it. I made the silly assumption it was a syntax theme causing the trouble.

This was the offending chunk of code in panes.less (specifically the opacity):

// Inactive Pane
atom-pane:not(.active) {
  opacity: 0.8;

  atom-text-editor {
    background-color: lighten(@app-background-color, 2%);
  }

  tabs-tab.active, .tab.active {
    border-bottom: solid 4px darken(@tab-highlight-color, 20%);
    &:before {
      border-bottom: solid 4px darken(@tab-highlight-color, 20%);
    }
  }
}

Cheers for pointing me in the right direction, I’ll fix that now.


How to not dim non-focused pane?
#4

Thanks caffiend! Simple solution is just to add the following to the styles.less:

// Inactive Pane
atom-pane:not(.active) {
  opacity: 1;
}

(I did it this way because I could not reference the LESS variables correctly for some reason.)


#5

Yep. I Figured I’d replied with my solution, but I guess not!

I did go for an inefficient use 1.0 rather than 1 though!