>> Word syntax is clearly wrong. Symbol syntax (i.e. "_") OTOH sounds right.
> I would be happy to agree. But \\s_ doesn't seem to match anything, and
It matches any char marked with the _ syntax, which is the syntax to use for
chars which are not word-chars but are allowed as part of symbols.
> \\sw doesn't match anything designated as ("\\(::\\)" (1 "_")).
Of course not. To match a symbol try "\\(\\sw\\|\\s_)+".
> It only matches "w". Word syntax may be "wrong" for English, but in perl
> ':' is equivalent to A or q or whatever.
No, it's not the same thing. Emacs distinguishes words from symbols and
it's quite handy sometimes.
> I'll go with the precedent, but if it's better without, you can remove
> both the 'starting-with-&' and the 'followed-by-a-(' expressions.
> They're both pretty equivocably defined as function calls, not function
> definitions, in perl.
Agreed.
> "\\(?:\\<foreach\\>\\|\\<for\\>\\)\\s *\\(\\sw+\\)\\s *(" and... then
> how to make that /not/ highlighted, while every other
> "\\(\\sw+\\)\\s *(" gets highlighted as a function call?
Aren't there more cases? like
print HANDLE (arg1, arg2) ?
>> Could you (re)send a context diff rather than plain diff?
> Um, sure.
Thank you.
Stefan
_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
