On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Ben Fritz wrote: > > We have a tip, created in July, which we are just getting around to > deciding what to do with: > > http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Syntax_heredoc_highlighting_for_dosini > > As I said in the discussion when the tip was first submitted, "if > dosini (whatever it is) actually does support heredoc, this should be > submitted on vim_dev and to the syntax maintainer as a patch, rather > than as a tip here." > > If I understand correctly, "dosini" refers to DOS-style init files, > with the ".ini" extension. > > I know pretty much nothing else about this syntax.
Right... it's not exactly the most standardized format out there. Some parsers support quoted RHS, others don't. It wouldn't shock me if some support heredocs, but for the ones that do, is "dosini" really the best filetype name? DOS doesn't support heredocs AFAIR, and .ini is used on other systems than DOS as an easily-parseable format... Maybe "dosini.vim" should be moved to "ini.vim", since it is used on non-dos systems? Is there any precedent for renaming a filetype? > So, does dosini support heredoc-style assignments? The tip seems to > imply that *many* but not *all* programs that use .ini files can > support, so perhaps it would be better as a tip than an official part > of the syntax file. But I'd like to get input from those that know > more about this before proceeding. Well... how much harm is there in including it even if it isn't supported? It would only affect people who assign a variable a value matching /<<\(\I\i*\)/ - wouldn't it be safe to assume that no one would do that unless they knew the file would be parsed by something supporting heredocs? ~Matt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
