Hi Daniel,
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 03:32:39PM +0100, Daniel Mack wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> On 09.03.2013 15:26, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 03:07:35PM +0100, Daniel Mack wrote:
> >> Hi Markus,
> >>
> >> On 09.03.2013 13:41, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Markus Pargmann wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Small improvement to highlight nodes with addresses in devicetree files.
> >>
> >> Can you give me an example of such a node, so I can reproduce this here
> >> and test you patch?
> >
> > The first one is an example for nodes without addresses, so not
> > highlighted. The second one has an address in its name ('@10001000').
>
> Hmm, why wouldn't you want them *all* highlighted? Wouldn't that be even
> nicer? IOW, why not treat all symbols that are followed by a "{" as a node?
Yes you are right, matching all of them is probably nicer. But I don't
think we should treat all names inside a block as nodes. Most of the
items are properties.
Regards,
Markus
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
