Syntax highlighting regressions

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Syntax highlighting regressions

Doug Kearns
Tim,

I haven't had a chance to investigate these yet but I notice that:

1. The escaped delimiter in regular expressions are no longer
highlighted correctly:

%r$foo \$ foo$

2. rubyInvalidVariable seems to be overly aggressive in its matching
of invalid variables.  E.g. it picks up any variable with a leading
"$_"

3. It seems a minus sign preceding numbers is now being matched as
part of the number highlight group.  Is that intentional?  As the plus
sign is not being matched I assume it isn't.  I did have a
conversation with Bram about this years ago and he seemed to recommend
excluding the sign chars as most of the syntax files do.

I'll leave it an extra day anyway to give you a chance to answer these
or if you're busy I'll fix them tomorrow night when I have the extra
time.

Doug
_______________________________________________
vim-ruby-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/vim-ruby-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Syntax highlighting regressions

Tim Pope-2
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 04:39:07PM +1000, Doug Kearns wrote:
> Tim,
>
> I haven't had a chance to investigate these yet but I notice that:
>
> 1. The escaped delimiter in regular expressions are no longer
> highlighted correctly:
>
> %r$foo \$ foo$
I can't reproduce this; \$ is highlighted as rubyRegexpEscape here.
Is that not desired?

> 2. rubyInvalidVariable seems to be overly aggressive in its matching
> of invalid variables.  E.g. it picks up any variable with a leading
> "$_"

Eek, fixed that particular case.

> 3. It seems a minus sign preceding numbers is now being matched as
> part of the number highlight group.  Is that intentional?  As the plus
> sign is not being matched I assume it isn't.  I did have a
> conversation with Bram about this years ago and he seemed to recommend
> excluding the sign chars as most of the syntax files do.

Yes it was intentional.  I think it looks better and I might have been
doing it for some other side effect but I no longer remember so if you
want to strip it out, go for it.

Thanks,
Tim
_______________________________________________
vim-ruby-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/vim-ruby-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Syntax highlighting regressions

Tim Pope-2
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 12:26:08AM -0400, Tim Pope wrote:
> > 3. It seems a minus sign preceding numbers is now being matched as
> > part of the number highlight group.  Is that intentional?  As the plus
> > sign is not being matched I assume it isn't.  I did have a
> > conversation with Bram about this years ago and he seemed to recommend
> > excluding the sign chars as most of the syntax files do.
>
> Yes it was intentional.  I think it looks better and I might have been
> doing it for some other side effect but I no longer remember so if you
> want to strip it out, go for it.

Err, to further clarify, the omission of "+" was unintentional.  I've
gone ahead and pulled out "-" highlighting for now but I'd really like
to see it restored at a later point.  Note that -(3) calls the unary -
operator on 3 but -3 is a literal syntax that does not.  So I think
highlighting the "-" as part of the number makes sense.

One further request.  As soon as the suite is in satisfactory
condition, could we go ahead and email it to Bram and deal with the
release notes and release after the fact?

Cheers,
Tim
_______________________________________________
vim-ruby-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/vim-ruby-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Syntax highlighting regressions

Doug Kearns
In reply to this post by Tim Pope-2
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Tim Pope <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 04:39:07PM +1000, Doug Kearns wrote:

<snip>

>> 1. The escaped delimiter in regular expressions are no longer
>> highlighted correctly:
>>
>> %r$foo \$ foo$
> I can't reproduce this; \$ is highlighted as rubyRegexpEscape here.
> Is that not desired?

Right, having had a quick look at it, it just seems that we're missing
a number of possible delimiter chars.  E.g. %r@foo \@ foo@ Off the top
of my head there's [~`!@#%&-_=:;"',><]  I'll fix those first thing
tomorrow if you don't beat me to it.

Before these weren't highlighted specially so your changes are
actually an improvement.

On a more general note, thanks very much for improving the general
RegExp related syntax commands - much nicer.

<snip>

Thanks,
Doug
_______________________________________________
vim-ruby-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/vim-ruby-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Syntax highlighting regressions

Doug Kearns
In reply to this post by Tim Pope-2
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Tim Pope <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 12:26:08AM -0400, Tim Pope wrote:
>> > 3. It seems a minus sign preceding numbers is now being matched as
>> > part of the number highlight group.  Is that intentional?  As the plus
>> > sign is not being matched I assume it isn't.  I did have a
>> > conversation with Bram about this years ago and he seemed to recommend
>> > excluding the sign chars as most of the syntax files do.
>>
>> Yes it was intentional.  I think it looks better and I might have been
>> doing it for some other side effect but I no longer remember so if you
>> want to strip it out, go for it.
>
> Err, to further clarify, the omission of "+" was unintentional.  I've
> gone ahead and pulled out "-" highlighting for now but I'd really like
> to see it restored at a later point.  Note that -(3) calls the unary -
> operator on 3 but -3 is a literal syntax that does not.  So I think
> highlighting the "-" as part of the number makes sense.

I tend to agree, it's just that I recall having a conversation with
Bram about it and we decided to try and keep it consistent across the
syntax files.  A quick check seems to suggest that most still don't
seem to highlight the sign char.

> One further request.  As soon as the suite is in satisfactory
> condition, could we go ahead and email it to Bram and deal with the
> release notes and release after the fact?

Yes, that was my intention too. ;-)

I'll just give Mark an opportunity to respond first regarding that
rubycomplete.vim patch or, alternatively, we can just send the other
files in the interim if he's busy at the moment.

Thanks,
Doug
_______________________________________________
vim-ruby-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/vim-ruby-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Syntax highlighting regressions

Doug Kearns
In reply to this post by Doug Kearns
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:41 AM, Doug Kearns <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Tim Pope <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 04:39:07PM +1000, Doug Kearns wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> 1. The escaped delimiter in regular expressions are no longer
>>> highlighted correctly:
>>>
>>> %r$foo \$ foo$
>> I can't reproduce this; \$ is highlighted as rubyRegexpEscape here.
>> Is that not desired?

Sorry, I actually misread that as rubyEscapeDelim...  So, I think that
it's fine as it is at the moment.

<snip>

Doug
_______________________________________________
vim-ruby-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/vim-ruby-devel
Loading...