 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When the POV-Team release the src for 3.5 could they make sure the
following message (or something to that end) is placed in parse.h just
before the token enumeration and perhaps in tokenize.c before the
Reserved_Words array
/************************************************************
If you add several keywords that use the same token value make sure that
you add
1 token for each keyword* otherwise you will get a "too many
initalisers" compile error.
*all but one of these will be unused
eg. different spellings of words - colour/color
parse.h tokenize.c
COLOR_TOKEN //unused {COLOUR_TOKEN, "color"},
COLOUR_TOKEN {COLOUR_TOKEN, "colour"},
************************************************************/
The reason being that this error can be confusing & it took me a couple
of hrs to work it out >: < duh-huh
Also for the win32 version the codemax control could use the
Reserved_Words array to do syntax highlighting for all patches of
POV-Ray automatically
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 01 May 2000 14:37:00 +0800, Pabs wrote:
>When the POV-Team release the src for 3.5 could they make sure the
>following message (or something to that end) is placed in parse.h just
>before the token enumeration and perhaps in tokenize.c before the
>Reserved_Words array
You're asking for documentation? What are ya, nuts? :)
>Also for the win32 version the codemax control could use the
>Reserved_Words array to do syntax highlighting for all patches of
>POV-Ray automatically
I submitted a patch to do this to Chris just before I joined the POV-Team.
While it would work, we have other ideas in mind that will provide the
same benefits.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1 May 2000 11:29:57 -0400, ron### [at] povray org (Ron Parker) wrote
concerning highlighting unofficial reserved words:
>I submitted a patch to do this to Chris just before I joined the POV-Team.
>While it would work, we have other ideas in mind that will provide the
>same benefits.
It would be really cool if all the unofficial words could be colored
differently from the official ones, but I'm not sure if this would be
easy for you to do.
Later,
Glen Berry
( Remove the "7" from 7no### [at] ezwvcom to email me. )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It would be better if they could somehow be underlined.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 1 May 2000 12:31:10 -0400, "TonyB" <ben### [at] panamac-comnet>
wrote:
>It would be better if they could somehow be underlined.
That would be okay with me, but I bet this is even harder to achieve.
( Remove the "7" from 7no### [at] ezwvcom to email me. )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 1 May 2000 12:31:10 -0400, TonyB wrote:
>It would be better if they could somehow be underlined.
Underlines sound great at first, but they get useless quickly when
overused. I'm posting with slrn from home using ssh from my Windows
box at work; the particular client I use doesn't support colored text,
so slrn helpfully underlines first-level quotes instead of color-
coding them as it usually would. The effect is anything but readable.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry wrote:
> It would be really cool if all the unofficial words could be colored
> differently from the official ones, but I'm not sure if this would be
> easy for you to do.
Easy - modify the Reserved word to have a flag that determines if the token is
official or not, and allow the syntax highlighting mechanism to use this flag
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
