[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table
From: |
Wedler, Christoph |
Subject: |
RE: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Nov 2015 18:24:34 +0000 |
> On 11/18/2015 08:06 PM, Wedler, Christoph wrote:
>> * Solution 1: the font-lock syntax table must not differ too much from
>> the normal syntax table, i.e., the function in
> I think this is the current consensus. It shouldn't differ in paren,
> comment or string syntax. IOW, it should be syntax-ppss-compatible with
> the main one.
OK, fine with me.
> syntax-propertize-function should behave the same. If so, it should
> be probably documented.
> It should.
And syntax-propertize should be called at more places. Currently, doing
it lazily does not really work, as it is not called when needed. That
is why js-mode calls (syntax-propertize (point-max)) at the end (and I
will do the same in antlr-mode).
My other question was concerning (nth 9 ppss), i.e. the list of open
parentheses is very useful to have (and its also used in syntax.el
itself) -> I would like to have this to be official in the lisp
docstring as well - in src/syntax.c, we have
struct lisp_parse_state
{
[...]
Lisp_Object levelstarts; /* Char numbers of starts-of-expression
of levels (starting from outermost). */
};
>> Any other ideas?
> Support different syntax tables in different parts of the buffer. That
> must be a part of our eventual multi-major-mode solution.
In the case of antlr-mode (grammar with actions), it could be done as
long as it does not break the calulation of the "inner-mode-chunk-end",
e.g, with Python actions
rule: "KEYWORD" { do_something { } # do it };
the action ends with the final "}" (even though a naive Python-like
syntax-propertization would think of it as part of a comment)
- Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table, Wedler, Christoph, 2015/11/18
- Re: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table, Dmitry Gutov, 2015/11/18
- RE: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table,
Wedler, Christoph <=
- Re: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table, Dmitry Gutov, 2015/11/20
- RE: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table, Wedler, Christoph, 2015/11/23
- Re: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table, Dmitry Gutov, 2015/11/23
- RE: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table, Wedler, Christoph, 2015/11/24
- Re: Clarification needed: syntax-propertize vs font-lock-syntax-table, Dmitry Gutov, 2015/11/24