On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:06:24 -0700 Shankhoneer Chakrovarty <shankhon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Last and least, pull request #191 and SF patch #11 are earlier than > > #226. If one of them is applied, #226 will be seriously broken. > > > > I had no idea about these PRs. Thanks for pointing this out. I will check > them. Hmmm... I wrote to the mailing list about them, answering to "shan chak <shankhol...@gmail.com>", though that's not identical to your account. > So I guess what you are trying to suggest is: > 1. Generalize the behavior for all the programming languages supported by > geany. I have to find out which languages generate warning messages and > which dont, this may take some time. For the old parser, I think covering the example messages will be enough. > 2. Remove the hard coding of line_idx+2 Looking at the D/HTML examples, a simple indexing will not work. > 3. Make changes for both regex parsing as well as older parsing method Regex should be covered, of course... though that'll lead to even more conflicts between PR #226 and PR #191-or-SF patch #11. > If I make these changes, will then you merge the PR? Or Do I need to do > more changes? Please feel free to give me feedback. [...] Disclaimer: I'm not a leading developer, and can't merge your changes. What I can tell you, however, is that the current partial PR #226 is not very likely to be considered. As the author of SF patch #11, I plan to extend it for warnings, using code from PR #226, except for the parsing. But I don't have time now. -- E-gards: Jimmy _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.geany.org https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel