Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from January 2004
>>>>> "LW" == Larry Wall <larry@wall.org> writes: LW> This would be relatively straightforward for syntax highlighters, LW> I think. But Perl 6 will throw other curves at highlighters that LW> will be much more difficult to solve, such as the fact that any LW> C<use> potentially changes the subsequent syntax. Even an operator LW> declaration changes the subsequent syntax. Making things easy for LW> syntax highlighters is not a primary design goal for Perl 6--in this LW> Perl will remain the AntiLisp. and don't forget that since p6 will use the <perl> grammar to parse perl, that will be available to syntax highlighters. no more wacko heuristics and broken colors (i don't use them anyway. i can parse code just fine with b&w :) depending on what the <perl> grammar produces there might be some extra processing needed. as for use changing the subsequent syntax, run the grammar with a -c like option so those modules will get loaded and affect the generated syntax tree. another benefit of using the perl rules is that when changes are made to the <perl> grammar, all highlighter which use it will be automatically upgraded. they may have to add stuff for things which have new 'syntax categories'. uri -- Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com --Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding- Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.orgThread Previous | Thread Next