> Do we need some kind of vote or is Bram leaning one way?
This is not something to make a quick choice over. Ideally we see all
alternatives implemented, see how well each one works and then decide.
But that is an awful lot of work and throwing away much of it.
We should start with setting some requirements. Some will be hard
requirements, some will be preferences or "good to have".
A hard requirement is that displaying and editing text should not be
noticeably slowed down by highlighting.
Having the highlighting show up asynchronously, or become more accurate
after a delay, is considered bad, only to be used if there is no other
way. For the bulk of the files it should be instantaneous. We have had
quite a few users complain about flickering, we don't want to introduce
more of that.
A very good thing to have (but not a hard requirement) is being able to
use language specifications that other editors use.
A hard requirement is that it must be possible to use a language
specification (fetch it from github) without installing tools (compiler,
builder program, etc.). Thus the specification must be usable on any
computer with just Vim installed. Providing it pre-compiled in some way
is fine (although taking care of versions might add new problems).
We would prefer to use the regexp engine we already have, not add another
one (not only for code size, also to avoid having to learn yet another
syntax). Possibly a regexp syntax that is close enough can be
translated into Vim's regexp syntax.
It should be fairly easy to create and maintain a language
specification. About the same as with the current syntax highlighting
(or easier, hopefully). It must be able to handle any language (some
better than others).
One important question is which kind of language specification works
best for specifying the structure and get good highlighting?
Independent of the engine used to execute it. After all, if it is
difficult to write or doesn't get the correct highlighting, then we
won't get people writing them.
If needed, we could accept more than one specification. E.g. one that
other editors use and one that works better (hopefully with the same
engine). We'll have to also support the old syntax highlighting anyway.
--
Micro$oft: where do you want to go today?
Linux: where do you want to go tomorrow?
FreeBSD: are you guys coming, or what?
/// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// \\\
\\\ sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
--
--
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].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/20220910111735.4E3AA1C0D18%40moolenaar.net.
