Trey Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
As you already noticed cperl-mode.el is a very strange piece of
software. It's probably misunderstood like astronomers in the Dark
> Variables with twigils whose name matches something else are getting
> recognized incorrectly. For example, $.x is getting interpreted as
> $. followed by the x operator, $.system as $. and system, and so on.
I already tried to do something about twigils and the dot syntax
($.foo, %.foo, ...) *should* already work. If not, I might have
introduced bugs during rather strange merge sessions with original
cperl-mode that sometimes happen.
First you could try an older revision, I recommend r7845 or r10822 of
Second, there are known issues with two, hm, how to say?, "different
highlighting models" that seem to rival each other. Bind a key to
re-fontify and see what happens. In my emacs config I use
(global-set-key [f3] 'font-lock-fontify-buffer)
and pressing f3 corrects the wrong highlighting. I don't know why
that's the case. Dark Ages are calling.
> Can anyone help fix cperl-mode with twigils?
I will help, I already have some kind of that "thousand yard stare"
when I look at it. I'm only just in the middle of one of those "lack
of time" phases.
Generally I currently feel quite alone with my patches. I already
contacted local lisp heros in my town but they say: start to refactor
some things (even with concrete code suggestions), but I didn't
implemented them because of drifting away from original
cperl-mode. Incorporating my patches is difficult because of at least
one huge, silly copy'n'paste hack to make the new regex syntax
possible. And my Lisp-Foo an not match with the "officialness" and the
extreme backwards compatibility demands of the original cperl-mode.
*Maybe* a clear fork away from the original cperl-mode would make
sense. We could refactor with the help of other lisp coders and throw
away backwards compatibility issues we don't know about. But it's a
very big "maybe". Having one mode for all perl versions and for both
major Emacs variants with high backwards compatibility is a big plus
and there is much knowledge in original cperl-mode that progresses
itself, even as we speak. Currently I wouldn't fork it.
BTW, I work with XEmacs 21.4.7.
What's your Emacs?
Steffen Schwigon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dresden Perl Mongers <http://dresden-pm.org/>