On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 15:01, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 02:03:25PM +0200, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > > > i think it should be part of the syntax definition, which would be > > > extended from highlighting only. > > > > This is not about highlighting, the highlighting is a side effect of > > the "jump to matching bracket" option. > > > > This code in no way interferes with the syntax highlighting. > > > wow, _that_ was new to me ... haha.
? Not sure what to make of this (cynicism or a genuine remark). I ment they use different code paths (afaict). > and now re-read the sentence you > quoted yourself and think about it. Well, "should be part of the syntax definition" yes. But that's not currently the case. So I don't see why we couldn't extend the current functionality (until you've finished the syntax highlighting rewrite ;) ). > the highlighting hurts - not much, but it is still annoying. It's already there for the other brackets, and if this would be configurable you wouldn't have to look at extra highlighted characters. Maybe we should add a match for NULL strings to disable that code path so we would make you even more happy. Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research _______________________________________________ Mc-devel mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
