On Sun, 14 May 2017 12:20:43 -0600, Wolfgang Schuster
<schuster.wolfg...@gmail.com> wrote:
OTOH user-defined commands can be added to the ConTeXt lexer via the
Style Configurator (Notepad++) and get their own highlight color. I
have found this very useful in writing long documents. See attached
(User-defined Keywords dialog).
You can limit the number of custom commands when you use
\startnamedsection[topic][title=...]
instead of
\starttopic[title=...]
First time encountering these two commands; they're not on the wiki, need
to learn more about them..
Can you explain or give a complete sample test file illustrating how they
apply in the matter under discussion? Thanks.
Environments with custom begin/end-strings (e.g. \bTR)
<cd:command name="TR" type="environment" begin="b" end="e"
file="tabl-ntb.mkiv">
<cd:arguments>
<cd:assignments list="yes" optional="yes">
<cd:inherit name="setupTABLE"/>
</cd:assignments>
</cd:arguments>
</cd:command>
get the default start/stop string in the scite files.
Ah, "setupTABLE" is listed in scite-context-data-interfaces.lua.
\bTABLE is also listed but Hans script includes it as \startTABLE
(because it ignores the begin/end attributes).
Wolfgang: In that case, is there a way to generate an explicit list of
all concrete commands that derive from the ["en"] class in
scite-context-data-interfaces? If the results are sufficiently
complete, we could distinguish high-level mkiv commands from the
low-level ones. Such a list might be more beneficial for most users.
Put another way, we could have
mkiv-list-high - one syntax highlighting (say, bold)
mkiv-list-low - second syntax highlighting (say, regular)
OTOH, much of this is a matter of taste: I would argue that \unprotect
and \protect are high-level (as part of the meta-language used to mark
off low-level code) and should therefore go into
scite-context-data-interfaces (not there at present).
Adding tags to the commands is planned but the question is how to
categorize them (internal, api, user level, low level, primitives,
defininitions (\define...), setups etc.).
This is good to know. At the moment we're working on a full-featured
ConTeXt lexer and are experimenting with different ideas of organizing
commands for user-friendly syntax highlighting. Currently considering
something like the following:
TeX primitives - Knuth
luaTeX primitives - excluding Knuth
macro structure - e.g., sectioning etc.
micro structure - e.g., itemizations, tables etc.
mode structure - e.g., metapost, xml, markdown
MkiV - remaining high level
MkIV - low-level [but how to separate them out?]
user-defined
Perhaps collapse macro and micro structure into one set... Again, just
ideas for now, will work this week to work them into a concrete
organization for the lexer - once we generate a complete list of concrete
mkiv commands.
If we can generate a complete version of the list in
scite-context-data-interfaces (including \bTR etc.) then we can subtract
that from the complete list of concrete mkiv commands, giving us mutually
exclusive and jointly exhaustive high/low-level lists.
Any help and other ideas are greatly appreciated!
Idris
--
Idris Samawi Hamid, Professor
Department of Philosophy
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80512
_______________________________________________
dev-context mailing list
dev-context@ntg.nl
https://mailman.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dev-context
