I'm afraid I'm not used to mailing-lists, especially when using the digest version. I've posted my response without the subject, so I copy it again here.
I'm sending also the patch, this time it's the full version with the tagmanager/txt2tags.c file correctly included.
I'm just wondering whether it isn't possible to extend the Markdown parser to parse txt2tags files as well.
it's problably possible because the txt2tags tags don't interfere with the markdown for this part. But...
This way we wouldn't need to add yet another filetype in Geany.
yet the extension for txt2tags files is different. And in case I or someone manage to write the scintilla lexer, the rest of the txt2tags syntax would interfere with the markdown one.
Your patch doesn't list any changes to Scintilla code,
I didn't include it, maybe I could have done it (without the scintilla lexer)? I'm still not satisfied with my scintilla lexer, because I managed only to highlight the tags and not the text. I'll propose it in a later revision.
Besides, the first time I inserted my changes, I did it on the released version 0.18, so I had to do it again with the svn version later.
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:20:51 +0000 (GMT), Forgeot wrote:
Hi,
I'm afraid I'm not used to mailing-lists, especially when using the digest version. I've posted my response without the subject, so I copy it again here.
:).
I'm sending also the patch, this time it's the full version with the tagmanager/txt2tags.c file correctly included.
Well, sending only the plain C file was also good enough.
I'm just wondering whether it isn't possible to extend the Markdown parser to parse txt2tags files as well.
it's problably possible because the txt2tags tags don't interfere with the markdown for this part. But...
This way we wouldn't need to add yet another filetype in Geany.
yet the extension for txt2tags files is different. And in case I or someone manage to write the scintilla lexer, the rest of the txt2tags syntax would interfere with the markdown one.
I see. So it's probably just easier to really do it as two separate filetypes. However, also in Scintilla some lexers share the same code base, i.e. there is on source file and they contain two lexers for two similar languages and these lexers share some code. But this is completely up to you and the Scintilla project how to organise the code. It's probably easier, at least for the start, to do it as a separate lexer. So, ignore me :).
Your patch doesn't list any changes to Scintilla code,
I didn't include it, maybe I could have done it (without the scintilla lexer)? I'm still not satisfied with my scintilla lexer, because I
Ah ok, I see. No problem. As Nick said, the best is when the lexer get into the Scintilla project (when it's ready for general use) . So, don't worry.
So far the patch looks fine.
Regards, Enrico