[...]
First thing when I look at the file: it looks terribly repetitive! Maybe something in the style of filetype's sections copying ([name=othername]) would help having all this clearer, ending up with something like
To be honest Colomban I expected that the various language enthusiasts would pop up proposals of more tailored versions for each of the languages. ie I didn't think they would stay repetitive.
I notice that I only posted to geany-devel, I will send to geany-users as well, we may get more feedback.
[C] if=... else=...
[C++=C] try=...
[Java=C++] [PHP=C++] [C#=C++] [Javascript=C++] ...
[Python] if=... else=...
[HTML] table=...
Needs to be implemented, but a first though make me think it'd make easier to have/configure per-filetype snippets.
What do you think?
*If* the repition is really correct then either this proposal or Matthews alternate proposal of moving the snippets to the filetype files is the long term solution.
But if the level of interest is indicated by the responses, then not many people use these snippets, so maybe it isn't worth the effort of either approach and just repeat things for now and possibly over time the definitions will diverge.
I'll collate suggestions, patches etc then commit.
Why keep an empty [Haskell] section?
Again I expected proposals for some proper Haskell ones, but again looks like no-one uses snippets much.
Of course possibly no-one uses snippets because ATM they are all C. Certainly they are pretty useless for C++ despite the language similarities, eg for(;;) is often iterator based in C++ not int i etc.
If we don't get much feedback from the user list I suggest just using the modified snippets.conf to stop the unwanted interference and not bothering with the effort to change code that isn't adding much value.
Cheers Lex
Cheers, Colomban _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel