Re: Small improvements to ruby-mode

[Bozhidar Batsov <bozhidar@batsov.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4009 bytes --]

On Saturday, June 22, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> > > * Font-lock changes
> > > Some of the Ruby "keywords" that are currently highlighted as keywords are
> > > not actually Ruby keywords, but plain methods - alias_method,
> > > module_function, throw, raise, private, protected, public. I feel that they
> > > should not be highlighted like this to keep the highlighting syntactically
> > > correct. Technically speaking true, false and self are also keywords, but
> > > given their semantics I guess the current highlighting is ok. 
> > > On a related note I think that it would make sense to use
> > > font-lock-builtin-face for methods like alias_method, module_function,
> > > throw, raise, private, protected, public and other keyword like methods for
> > > Kernel and Module. I feel that such a move would increase the readability of
> > > the Ruby source code.
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Good idea, done in revno 113128. I also added require, require_relative
> and autoload to the second list. 
> 
> 


Great! Thanks a lot of the quick response!
 
> Should we add more, e.g. include,
> attr_accessor, using, refine?
> 
> 

Yes, I think we should definitely add more. The ones you listed - for sure. We should also add fail (it's a synonym for raise), extend, etc. Btw catch is also a method, not a keyword. loop should also be on the second list, as should be proc and lambda IMO.

I'd also suggest adding the "command-like" methods for Kernel that are usually used without an explicit receiver everywhere. There's not that many such commands:

abort
at_exit
catch
eval
exec
exit
exit!
fail
fork
format
p
print
printf
putc
puts
rand
sleep
spawn
sprintf
srand
syscall
system
trap
warn 
> 
> > > * Treat more filenames/file extensions as Ruby code
> > 
> > > Most Rubyists these days have to add the following in their Emacs config:
> > 
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("\\.rake\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("\\.ru\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("Gemfile\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("Guardfile\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("Capfile\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("\\.thor\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("Thorfile\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("Vagrantfile\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("\\.jbuilder\\'" . ruby-mode))
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > These should be consolidated into a single regexp and should probably be
> > made a bit tighter (e.g. don't put BadCapfile in ruby-mode).
> > 
> 
> 
> Also done, revno 113129 and 113130.
Fantastic! 
> 
> > I'm not too happy about having so many different patterns, tho (even if
> > consolidated into a single regexp). Why are so many different namings
> > used?
> > 
> 
> 
> These are for different tools, using different DSLs inside. Anyway, I
> blame Make, they started it.
> 
> > It sounds like the Ruby people consider that all the world is
> > Ruby and other tools just have to deal with it. Would it have been so
> > hard to add a .rb to all those <Foo>file ?
> > 
> 
> 
> Most of (?) these work just as well if you add the extension, but nobody
> actually does that.
> 
> > > * Implement some ruby-tools like commands in ruby-mode
> > > ruby-tools is a small package, that adds some extra code manipulation
> > > commands https://github.com/rejeep/ruby-tools
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > We could integrate it into ruby-mode, of course.
> 
> I'm not so sure about re-implementing it, though. It's easy enough to
> install in its current form, no?
> 
> 

Sure - my point is that not all Emacs users would know about the package. I'd venture a guess saying most of them won't. The functionality in it seems a perfect fit for ruby-mode. Even if it has to be reimplemented - we're talking about a only a handful of not particularly complex commands. 
> 
> Patches and suggestions on what polish we could provide exactly are
> always welcome.
> 
> 



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6305 bytes --]