Woah, you're good Robby! Now that you mention it, it's true that I see this blue box more often.
Well, then, if at some point you feel like coloring contracts... ;) On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu>wrote: > Actually, the documentation blue boxes thing in the upper-right corner > (is that also what you're referring to by the identifier information > rectangle) does this. I did it as kind of an experiment to see how > well that approach would work. It seems to be going okay so far, and > it could be generalized to handle colors or other such information > that is probably not invalidated by an edit, while we wait for latest > online check syntax information to come back. Right now, when you edit > the buffer, it only invalidates the blue boxes for the editor ranges > that were actually edited. For example, if you have > > (define x (list 1 2 3)) > > and you change the program to > > (define x (liPQRst 1 2 3)) > > then the "define" blue box sticks around (until the check syntax > results come back saying the entire buffer is bogus). > > Robby > > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Laurent <laurent.ors...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> I'm not sure if that's the best thing, but > >> the reason I did it that was was to avoid colors flashing around, as > >> the check syntax information comes and goes as you edit the buffer. > > > > > > Ah yes, there might be this problem indeed. > > Maybe it could be possible to keep a "partial" state of the syntax > checker, > > and only discard the parts that are being edited, until the document can > be > > checked entirely, possibly with a warning at the bottom right saying that > > the syntax checker is not currently in sync. > > That would help for the contract coloring as well as for the identifier > > information rectangle, but I'm not sure this is easy to implement. > > > > Laurent > > > >> > >> Robby > >> > >> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Laurent <laurent.ors...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > Starting my Xmas wish list: > >> > In case some developer doesn't know what to do (sure...), I think it > >> > would > >> > be visually quite helpful if contracts could be syntax-colored, for > >> > example > >> > in lighter blue. That would help quickly distinguish between the > actual > >> > code > >> > and the debugging code. > >> > > >> > Thanks :) > >> > Laurent > >> > > >> > ____________________ > >> > Racket Users list: > >> > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > >> > > > > > >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
