Re: [sigra@home.se: C++-mode: Syntax highlighting: wrong color for function identifier depending on the kind of whitespace that follows]

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Hi, Ralf!

On Wed, 5 Feb 2006, Ralf Angeli wrote:

>* Alan Mackenzie (2006-02-15) writes:

>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Stefan Monnier wrote:

>>>.... Based on the name, I suppose it's some kind of hook in
>>>font-lock-after-change-function, in which case I'd be tempted to suggest
>>>to move it to font-lock-fontify-region instead, to reduce the
>>>performance impact and make it easier to deal with lazy-lock&jit-lock
>>>since these tend to use their own after-change-function.

>> I strongly oppose such a change.  With that change:

>> (i) font-lock-fontify-region would no longer be fontifying the region
>> specified by its paramters, but a different (possibly larger) one. 
>> (ii) the hook function (which recalculates BEG and END) might well refer
>> to variables set by a before-change-functions hook.  (This is done in AWK
>> mode, for example).  f-l-f-region is regularly called when there is no
>> buffer change in progress.

>> Both of these things would make debugging a hook function much more
>> difficult than it already is.  Determining the region to fontify and
>> actually fontifying it are two logically distinct operations.  They
>> shouldn't be intermingled with eachother.

>This is all well and good, but in contrast to the after-change hook, a
>hook in `font-lock-default-fontify-region' could not only adjust the
>region after a change but also during fontification by chunks as done
>by jit-lock.  (That's an advantage I haven't noticed before.)

That is horrible.  f-l-d-f-r currently fontifies the region requested by
the caller, not a different region that Font Lock finds more convenient.
If we change its functionality, something somewhere will surely break.

>Following your reasoning of separating the determination of the region
>to be fontified from the fontification itself would require that
>jit-lock determines the chunks to be fontified more intelligently.

I don't follow that.  There are several different ways that jit-lock
determines its chunks.  There's after-change, after-scrolling, stealth,
at least.  I don't see why determining a jit-lock after-change region
need have anything to do with determining an after-scrolling or stealth
region.

>Ralf

-- 
Alan.




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642