rb highlighting is not up to the task yet

Hi,

I think it's nice that we are going towards consolidating our tools around RB.

However, the highlighting logic is not quite enough because if I have an error anywhere in the code, the whole highlighting disappears. In contrast, Shout manages to limit the problem only to the surrounding code.

Is anyone working on this part of the highlighting?

Cheers,

Doru

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

This depends on the kind of error. For example, a missing open or closed parenthesis will most

likely mark the whole (following) code.

But it should still highlight the preceding code.

Can you give an example.

nicolai

2015-09-04 23:10 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[hidden email]>:

Hi,

I think it's nice that we are going towards consolidating our tools around RB.

However, the highlighting logic is not quite enough because if I have an error anywhere in the code, the whole highlighting disappears. In contrast, Shout manages to limit the problem only to the surrounding code.

Is anyone working on this part of the highlighting?

Cheers,

Doru

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

Hello,

Yes, I am aware of that.

The idea was to evaluate how good the RB AST colouring is already and maybe find the energy to

fix all remaining problems… we fixed many but not all.

I propose that we keep it for some month more and if we don’t improve these problems go

back to the old scheme for Pharo5.

Then we can re-start to work on this in Pharo6.

Marcus

On 05 Sep 2015, at 07:28, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

Here is an example.

Type this in a playground in a Pharo 5 image, and all statements before the parentheses become black:

| a b c d |

a := 42.

b := a + 1.

c := b + 1.

d := c + 1.

 a . b . c . d }

<Playground-50.png>

Here is how this looks in a Pharo 4:

<Playground-40.png>

Cheers,

Doru

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:

This depends on the kind of error. For example, a missing open or closed parenthesis will most

likely mark the whole (following) code.

But it should still highlight the preceding code.

Can you give an example.

nicolai

2015-09-04 23:10 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[hidden email]>:

Hi,

I think it's nice that we are going towards consolidating our tools around RB.

However, the highlighting logic is not quite enough because if I have an error anywhere in the code, the whole highlighting disappears. In contrast, Shout manages to limit the problem only to the surrounding code.

Is anyone working on this part of the highlighting?

Cheers,

Doru

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

Hi,

Yes, indeed. I think it is already much better than it was some months ago, and I definitely think it is a great goal to have everything around RB.

My question was only if there is anyone that invests in this actively because perhaps we can work together?

Cheers,

Doru

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello,

Yes, I am aware of that.

The idea was to evaluate how good the RB AST colouring is already and maybe find the energy to

fix all remaining problems… we fixed many but not all.

I propose that we keep it for some month more and if we don’t improve these problems go

back to the old scheme for Pharo5.

Then we can re-start to work on this in Pharo6.

Marcus

On 05 Sep 2015, at 07:28, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

Here is an example.

Type this in a playground in a Pharo 5 image, and all statements before the parentheses become black:

| a b c d |

a := 42.

b := a + 1.

c := b + 1.

d := c + 1.

 a . b . c . d }

<Playground-50.png>

Here is how this looks in a Pharo 4:

<Playground-40.png>

Cheers,

Doru

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:

This depends on the kind of error. For example, a missing open or closed parenthesis will most

likely mark the whole (following) code.

But it should still highlight the preceding code.

Can you give an example.

nicolai

2015-09-04 23:10 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[hidden email]>:

Hi,

I think it's nice that we are going towards consolidating our tools around RB.

However, the highlighting logic is not quite enough because if I have an error anywhere in the code, the whole highlighting disappears. In contrast, Shout manages to limit the problem only to the surrounding code.

Is anyone working on this part of the highlighting?

Cheers,

Doru

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

I do, working with RBStyler makes much more fun than with the other one and working

with AST instead of plain code text, gives us many possibilities to create great tools (highlighter for example:) )

-> pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/16492/no-syntax-highlighting-if-last-expression-is-invalid-code

I think we should not go back to the old one, but force the work on the rb styler.

Just report any issues you see. 

2015-09-05 20:29 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[hidden email]>:

Hi,

Yes, indeed. I think it is already much better than it was some months ago, and I definitely think it is a great goal to have everything around RB.

My question was only if there is anyone that invests in this actively because perhaps we can work together?

Cheers,

Doru

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello,

Yes, I am aware of that.

The idea was to evaluate how good the RB AST colouring is already and maybe find the energy to

fix all remaining problems… we fixed many but not all.

I propose that we keep it for some month more and if we don’t improve these problems go

back to the old scheme for Pharo5.

Then we can re-start to work on this in Pharo6.

Marcus

On 05 Sep 2015, at 07:28, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

Here is an example.

Type this in a playground in a Pharo 5 image, and all statements before the parentheses become black:

| a b c d |

a := 42.

b := a + 1.

c := b + 1.

d := c + 1.

 a . b . c . d }

<Playground-50.png>

Here is how this looks in a Pharo 4:

<Playground-40.png>

Cheers,

Doru

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:

This depends on the kind of error. For example, a missing open or closed parenthesis will most

likely mark the whole (following) code.

But it should still highlight the preceding code.

Can you give an example.

nicolai

2015-09-04 23:10 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[hidden email]>:

Hi,

I think it's nice that we are going towards consolidating our tools around RB.

However, the highlighting logic is not quite enough because if I have an error anywhere in the code, the whole highlighting disappears. In contrast, Shout manages to limit the problem only to the surrounding code.

Is anyone working on this part of the highlighting?

Cheers,

Doru

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"

--

www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"