Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-05-07 Thread Jonathan Smith
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I know this is sortof late notice, but it would be great if this could go in 7.1 final :) The empty comment is still there. Just leave that line blank. No biggie, of course, just aesthetics. i could have sworn i fixed it. this time, though, it

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-05-07 Thread Bram Moolenaar
Jonathan Smith wrote: I know this is sortof late notice, but it would be great if this could go in 7.1 final :) The empty comment is still there. Just leave that line blank. No biggie, of course, just aesthetics. i could have sworn i fixed it. this time, though, it really is fixed.

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-26 Thread Jonathan Smith
sorry for the long time between replies. i've been busy on other things :) Nikolai Weibull wrote: Well, the rpm spec file-type has been with us a long time, well before we knew better. Try to give your file-type an as specific name as possible. You will not be getting the name recipe; it's

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-26 Thread Nikolai Weibull
It's getting there. On 4/26/07, Jonathan Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nikolai Weibull wrote: A better way of doing this is to do (substitute \w with whatever pattern your parser actually allows) syn match conaryUse \ Use\.\w\+ \ nextgroup=conaryUseFlag Oops. That should be

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-26 Thread Bram Moolenaar
Jonathan Smith wrote: sorry for the long time between replies. i've been busy on other things :) Nikolai Weibull wrote: Well, the rpm spec file-type has been with us a long time, well before we knew better. Try to give your file-type an as specific name as possible. You will not

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-21 Thread Nikolai Weibull
On 4/20/07, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Getting better. Nikola's comments also apply (thanks Nikola!). No problem. I guess there's a bug in the current Ctrl+N implementation? It seems to be cutting off the last character in the completion. ;-) nikolai

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-21 Thread A.J.Mechelynck
Nikolai Weibull wrote: On 4/20/07, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Getting better. Nikola's comments also apply (thanks Nikola!). No problem. I guess there's a bug in the current Ctrl+N implementation? It seems to be cutting off the last character in the completion. ;-) nikolai

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-21 Thread Nikolai Weibull
On 4/21/07, A.J.Mechelynck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nikolai Weibull wrote: On 4/20/07, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Getting better. Nikola's comments also apply (thanks Nikola!). No problem. I guess there's a bug in the current Ctrl+N implementation? It seems to be cutting

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-21 Thread A.J.Mechelynck
Nikolai Weibull wrote: On 4/21/07, A.J.Mechelynck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nikolai Weibull wrote: On 4/20/07, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Getting better. Nikola's comments also apply (thanks Nikola!). No problem. I guess there's a bug in the current Ctrl+N implementation?

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-20 Thread Bram Moolenaar
Jonathan Smith wrote: Conary [1] has a file format called a recipe [2] which is in many ways similar in function to a spec file or an ebuild. rPath has been maintaining a syntax highlighting file for this format, but it would be nice if vim would accept a patch to include this in the

Re: syntax highlighting addition

2007-04-19 Thread Jonathan Smith
Bram Moolenaar wrote: Jonathan Smith wrote: Conary [1] has a file format called a recipe [2] which is in many ways similar in function to a spec file or an ebuild. rPath has been maintaining a syntax highlighting file for this format, but it would be nice if vim would accept a patch to include