GNU bug report logs -
#17222
24.3; In f90-mode variables declared in continuation lines are not colored.
Previous Next
Full log
Message #16 received at 17222 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Mattias EngdegÄrd <mattiase <at> acm.org> writes:
> part at the end is a potential empty-string repetition that indicates an ambiguity which we'd like to remove.
> What is the desired grammar here? Moving to rx for clarity, the above snippet means
>
> (+ (* (not (in "\n!&")))
> (? "&\n"))
>
> What about rewriting it as
>
> (: (* (not (in "\n!&")))
> (* "&\n"
> (* (not (in "\n!&")))))
>
> which should be equivalent but unambiguous?
Yes, I think that's correct.
> However there may be something more fundamentally wrong with the original change, because it only seems to work for me after loading a file, not when writing the code incrementally. More precisely, when I've typed
>
> program main
> integer :: alpha, &&
>
> in a new buffer then everything looks correctly coloured, but if I add
>
> beta
>
> to the next line then it isn't fontified at all. Saving and reloading the buffer helps. Can you confirm?
Yes. I had forgotten all about the rules for multiline font locking
(i.e., (elisp)Multiline Font Lock). So I think my changes here were
basically misguided, and this should be implemented in a totally
different way.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
This bug report was last modified 3 years and 21 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.