I been thinking about this during the weekend, and I think I prefer the mode to be aware of nesting (unless you can cause it to blow the stack on a large file or something, which I think would be unlikely anyway), so I'm going to take the keywords from your mode and bolt on the set structures I had in my mode, maybe changing them all to the same colouring.
Will let you know when done (sometime later this week or so) so that you can have a look. I'm also thinking that regexps should have some highlighting... I may even push that into the Perl mode as it pisses me off greatly that regexps don't even know about variable substitution. Kind Regards, David. 2008/12/13 David Moss <dsm...@gmail.com> > I've had a really quick look at your mode, it looks good, and I like the > regularity in keyword highlighting. I'm going to have a proper look sometime > later on the weekend and will get back to you when I have done. > > Kind Regards, > > David. > > > 2008/12/12 Daniel Spiewak <djspie...@gmail.com> > > >> Sounds like a good plan. :-) At the moment, I think that what's in >> the mode is pretty solid, meaning I don't have anything planned to >> refine it further. (except for regexp syntax, which I don't know >> anything about) So, if you want to evaluate it now, that'd be great! >> >> As a minor aside, I don't actually recursively parse S-expressions. >> It's not a bad idea, but jEdit's weird treatment of eager-vs-lazy >> matching sometimes gets in the way. Instead, I just define <SEQ >> TYPE="OPERATOR">(</SEQ> and <SEQ TYPE="OPERATOR">)</SEQ>. I don't >> really know when I'm in an S-exp, but I don't think that's too much of >> a limitation. The only exception to the above is my highlighting of >> "blah" in (def blah 123). That's done with an EOL_SPAN_REGEXP which >> delegates to a new ruleset. This ruleset then in turn delegates back >> to main in the case where the S-exp is closed prior to the end-of- >> line. It's not a normal idiom for jEdit highlighting modes, but it >> seems to work fine. At least I didn't have to resort to *really* >> bizarre tricks like I did in my SASyLF and ReST modes (opening a SPAN >> that terminates on an assumed non-existent character, etc). >> >> Daniel >> >> On Dec 12, 1:15 pm, "David Moss" <dsm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Daniel, >> > >> > To be honest, the colours are the least important, much more relevant is >> > that structures are recursed properly and that the base language is >> defined. >> > >> > Let me know how you get on refining your mode and I'll have a look. When >> we >> > have agreed on something I can update the jedit patch so we have the >> best >> > superset in the editor. >> > >> > Does it sound like a plan? >> > >> > Kind Regards, >> > >> > David. >> > >> > 2008/12/12 Daniel Spiewak <djspie...@gmail.com> >> > >> > >> > >> > > Which highlighting does it use? >> > >> > > Daniel >> > >> > > On Dec 12, 5:10 am, blackdog <black...@ipowerhouse.com> wrote: >> > > > If anyone on this thread is interested I uploaded clj-jedit.tar.gz >> to >> > > > the group file section on an incompletejeditplugin for clojure. It >> > > > has the hilighting, repl, and namespace browser (courtesy of >> enclojure) >> > > > - anyone want to take it on and improve it, I don't have time right >> > > > now?? It was based on the scheme plugin. >> > >> > > > bd >> > >> > > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:30:37 -0800 (PST) >> > >> > > > Daniel Spiewak <djspie...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > > > I merged in all the interesting stuff from David Moss's >> ClojurejEdit >> > > > > mode. We do highlight things in very different colors, but all of >> the >> > > > > elements that his recognizes are also recognized by mine now. >> Also, I >> > > > > fixed the annoying issue with def: >> > >> > > > > (def this)(def that) >> > >> > > > > The above now highlights correctly. >> > >> > > > > Feedback is welcome. I'm certainly willing to change the way >> things >> > > > > are highlighted, add highlighting or remove it. >> > >> > > > > Daniel >> > >> > > > > On Dec 11, 2:58 pm, Daniel Spiewak <djspie...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > Hi, just saw this thread. I had made some modifications to the >> > > > > > > edit mode and uploaded it for inclusion (as a patch) >> > > > > > > here: >> > >http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2201893&grou... >> . >> > >> > > > > > > I haven't checked the status in a while as my internet is very >> > > > > > > intermittent ATM. Please let me know if there is anything >> missing >> > > > > > > from it or if I can in any way enhance the mode. >> > >> > > > > > I'll have to take a closer look at your new version. We >> probably >> > > > > > should merge our efforts. Your mode does do some things that >> mine >> > > > > > doesn't, and it doesn't really benefit anyone to have three >> > > > > > competing Clojure modes. :-) My mode is pretty convoluted in >> the >> > > > > > way it uses some <RULES/> tricks to highlight things like (def >> > > > > > blah), so it's probably easier if I steal your improvements and >> > > > > > merge them into mine. I'll give that a try later today and post >> > > > > > back with the results. >> > >> > > > > > Daniel >> > >> > > > -- >> > > > None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe >> they >> > > > are free — Goethe >> >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
