On 25 February 2012 20:03, Thomas Martitz thomas.martitz@student.htw-berlin.de wrote:
Am 25.02.2012 09:55, schrieb Lex Trotman:
On 25 February 2012 19:35, Frank Lanitzfrank@frank.uvena.de wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 10:43:10 +1100 Lex Trotmanelextr@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 February 2012 09:44, Thomas Martitz thomas.martitz@student.htw-berlin.de wrote:
Am 24.02.2012 23:34, schrieb Lex Trotman:
I don't agree with this change, the types are just that, types, not keywords, they should not be highlighted as keywords. They are not always available. This change should be reverted.
The list contained types before the commit and the commit just added more for completeness.
I suggest using the secondary for types instead.
Yes, good idea, if I understand the comment in highlightingmappings.h:206 it is meant for types.
Cheers Lex
PS the existing list contains the fundamental types that are always available without headers, these new ones need a header (though size_t is used so much that almost any header will do :)
I did like that idea adding more often used one. But you are right cleaning up a bit and maybe resorting them would be might a ice idea.
Cheers, Frank
Hi Frank,
I think Thomas' idea of adding those that are not fundamental types to the secondary list is the right thing, they get highlighted as types not keywords and as you say the common ones are then available. Best of both worlds :).
I think all the ones that were originally in the list were fundamental in C++11, so its only the new ones IIUC.
My idea was adding *all* types to secondary. Why differentiate between fundamental/"needs header" and others? The important point is they are types and not keywords.
Ok, I don't mind either way, just was retaining backward compatibility.
Cheers Lex
Best regards.
Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel