The most obvious use I can think of for a meta.data type of scope is to grab the current data structure in a single cut/copy.
On 8/23/06, thomas Aylott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 23, 2006, at 1:14 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote: On 23/8/2006, at 7:02, Chris Thomas wrote: [...] Note that the current top level string.* hierarchy should probably be placed under the proposed datatype hierarchy: inline-data.string.(double-quoted|whatever) One slight inconvenience is that we may want to style data structures with a faint change in background color, and that should apply to all but strings -- where strings would have a changed foreground color. So if we group them, we will see scope selectors like: 'data - data.string'. Though as string coloring is the dominant case, and can still use a simple scope selector, this might not be a real concern. I'm all for using scopes to describe the languages as they are. But i'm not feeling this data.string business. String feels like it should be a root element. Logically it might make a lot of sense to move it in under something more broad. But i can't conceive of an actual use for it. When would i ever want to color all data a single color? When would i ever want a snippet that only works in all of data, including strings? It just wouldn't ever get used like that, afaik. And would unnecessarily complicate the user's experience. However, the contents of arrays and objects and tables and all kinds of other random data structures would certainly all be grouped together in a theme all the time. thomas Aylott — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg _______________________________________________ textmate-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate-dev
_______________________________________________ textmate-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate-dev
