Am 25.02.2012 09:55, schrieb Lex Trotman:
On 25 February 2012 19:35, Frank Lanitz<[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 10:43:10 +1100
Lex Trotman<[email protected]> wrote:
On 25 February 2012 09:44, Thomas Martitz
<[email protected]> wrote:
Am 24.02.2012 23:34, schrieb Lex Trotman:
I don't agree with this change, the types are just that, types, not
keywords, they should not be highlighted as keywords. They are not
always available. This change should be reverted.
The list contained types before the commit and the commit just
added more for completeness.
I suggest using the secondary for types instead.
Yes, good idea, if I understand the comment in
highlightingmappings.h:206 it is meant for types.
Cheers
Lex
PS the existing list contains the fundamental types that are always
available without headers, these new ones need a header (though size_t
is used so much that almost any header will do :)
I did like that idea adding more often used one. But you are right
cleaning up a bit and maybe resorting them would be might a ice idea.
Cheers,
Frank
Hi Frank,
I think Thomas' idea of adding those that are not fundamental types to
the secondary list is the right thing, they get highlighted as types
not keywords and as you say the common ones are then available. Best
of both worlds :).
I think all the ones that were originally in the list were fundamental
in C++11, so its only the new ones IIUC.
My idea was adding *all* types to secondary. Why differentiate between
fundamental/"needs header" and others? The important point is they are
types and not keywords.
Best regards.
_______________________________________________
Geany-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
