char syntax of the $ in $var

char syntax of the $ in $var

[David Hansen]

Hello,

in sh-mode: the $ in $test has syntax 2 = word in perl-mode
syntax 10 = character quote and in cperl-mode it's 9 = escape.

I think it should at least be unique (I prefer the sh-mode
version as you can move the point across variables with M-f and
M-b).

David

Re: char syntax of the $ in $var

[Miles Bader]

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:03:51 +0100, David Hansen <david.hansen@gmx.net> wrote:
> in sh-mode: the $ in $test has syntax 2 = word in perl-mode
> syntax 10 = character quote and in cperl-mode it's 9 = escape.
> 
> I think it should at least be unique (I prefer the sh-mode
> version as you can move the point across variables with M-f and
> M-b).

Perl and sh are not identical in the way they treat the "$" in
variable names -- indeed it seems that the current state of things is
_backwards_:  In sh, the $ is not really part of the name, so having
emacs think it is can be quite annoying (the case that drives me nuts
is that dynamic-abbrev won't complete `$FO' based on a previous
`FOO_BAR=...'); this argues for giving the $ a non-word syntax.  In
perl, on the other hand, the $ is treated much more as if it's
actually part of the variable name (e.g., you write `$foo = 3'), so
giving the $ word syntax might the right thing to do for perl.

-Miles
-- 
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: char syntax of the $ in $var

[David Hansen]

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:05:18 +0900 Miles Bader wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:03:51 +0100, David Hansen wrote:
>> in sh-mode: the $ in $test has syntax 2 = word in perl-mode
>> syntax 10 = character quote and in cperl-mode it's 9 = escape.
>>
> In sh, the $ is not really part of the name, so having emacs
> think it is can be quite annoying (the case that drives me nuts
> is that dynamic-abbrev won't complete `$FO' based on a previous
> `FOO_BAR=...'); this argues for giving the $ a non-word syntax.

Sounds reasonable.

> In perl, on the other hand, the $ is treated much more as if
> it's actually part of the variable name (e.g., you write `$foo
> = 3'), so giving the $ word syntax might the right thing to do
> for perl.

You'll run into the same completion problems with e.g %foo and
$foo{'bar'}.  So probably all non-word syntax...

David

Re: char syntax of the $ in $var

[Kim F. Storm]

Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes:

>              In sh, the $ is not really part of the name, so having
> emacs think it is can be quite annoying (the case that drives me nuts
> is that dynamic-abbrev won't complete `$FO' based on a previous
> `FOO_BAR=...'); this argues for giving the $ a non-word syntax.

Agree 100%.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

Re: char syntax of the $ in $var

[Stefan]

>> in sh-mode: the $ in $test has syntax 2 = word in perl-mode
>> syntax 10 = character quote and in cperl-mode it's 9 = escape.
>> 
>> I think it should at least be unique (I prefer the sh-mode
>> version as you can move the point across variables with M-f and M-b).

I decided the quote syntax for perl-mode, so I'm biased.  But in any case
word-syntax for $ is wrong, just like it is wrong for _ or - or any other
non-alphabetic char.  Strangely, tho, $ has word syntax in fundamental mode
(which is from where sh-script inherits it, oddly enough).  Shouldn't it be
changed to quote syntax or symbol syntax (in fundamental-mode)?

In general, in Perl, $ plays many different roles and it should sometimes
have word/symbol/quote syntax, sometimes have escape syntax, perl-mode and
cperl-mode chose different defaults, and then tweak them on a case by case
basis with font-lock-syntactic-keywords.


        Stefan