Home » U++ Library support » LineEdit, EditFields, DocEdit » What do you think about this approach to making CodeEditor more user extendable?
Re: What do you think about this approach to making CodeEditor more user extendable? [message #45619 is a reply to message #45609] |
Thu, 17 December 2015 13:30 |
|
mirek
Messages: 13976 Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
cbpporter wrote on Tue, 15 December 2015 14:16Things that I'm trying to fine tune by language:
- highlighting of #ifdefs
- highlighting of @region
- highlighting of nested comments
- highlighting of doxygen like comments
- highlighting things like literal constants a bit differently based on language
- highlighting ids based on other id rules
- highlight a few symbolic meta constants as non-keywords, but as literal constants, like true, for languages where true is not a keyword, but a literal constant and should be highlighted as an int.
And achieve this in a pretty general and fast way.
And generally speaking, the C like language highlighter is able to approximately, often very closely, syntax highlight a given language, but as it currently stands:
- it is not able to properly 100% highlight some inputs. The changes would be trivial to make it 100% but
- would not be compatible with C++.
That's why I proposed a structure with bool options, to make sure that highlighting is fast. What I'd need it to handle, as just one of the examples, is "0.Foo" to be highlighted as a literal int, member selection punctuation, id. And "7.0.Bar" as literal double, member selection punctuation, id. And "7.0f.Foo" as float and so on. For all those pure OOP languages.
OK, so just to make it clear, what you are proposing concerns CSyntax highlighter?
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 09 04:09:31 CEST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01908 seconds
|