[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, def
From: |
Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: |
bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately |
Date: |
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 01:24:48 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 |
On 21/02/2023 17:31, Jacob Faibussowitsch wrote:
> but maybe a better default is to leave these faces totally blank and
> just purely `:inherit` from `font-lock-function-name-face`
I believe so.
+(defface font-lock-function-call-face
+ '((t :inherit font-lock-function-name-face :foreground "royalblue1"))
+ "Font Lock mode face used to highlight function calls."
+ :group 'font-lock-faces)
This one I was thinking of as well.
+(defface font-lock-member-function-call-face
+ '((t :inherit font-lock-function-name-face :foreground "brightred"))
+ "Font Lock mode face used to highlight member function calls."
+ :group 'font-lock-faces)
What's a "member function"? Is it like a method? If people want this
distinction, we can add such face. But I'm curious whether some other
editors use different colors for these cases.
I'm also wondering what face we're supposed to use for "receiver-less"
method calls, such as calls to the methods defined in the same class, in
e.g. Ruby and Java. Or C++/C#. They don't use 'this'.
I think more importantly, we need a new face for variables.
font-lock-variable-ref-face ?
I also wonder whether we'll need to separate faces for properties:
definitions vs. uses. That one we could use to do early, to keep the
names uniform, e.g. we'd have:
font-lock-function-name-face
font-lock-function-call-face
font-lock-variable-name-face
font-lock-variable-ref-face
font-lock-property-name-face
font-lock-property-ref-face
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Jacob Faibussowitsch, 2023/02/20
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/20
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Yuan Fu, 2023/02/21
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/02/21
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Jacob Faibussowitsch, 2023/02/21
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately,
Dmitry Gutov <=
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Jacob Faibussowitsch, 2023/02/22
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/02/22
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Yuan Fu, 2023/02/22
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/02/22
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/23
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/02/23
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/02/24
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
- bug#61655: [Tree sitter] [Feature Request] font-lock function calls, definitions, separately, Theodor Thornhill, 2023/02/24