Re: Regarding adding additional default font-lock faces

[Nathan Moreau]

Hello,

> Ah, right, thanks.  I never use languages where this is used, but now
> that I see it, I do remember having heard of it.
>
>

Another examples:
- Recent versions of ocaml has something similar:
http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/extn.html#s%3Aattributes

- c++ as well : https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/attributes

- One can maybe argue that python decorators could be fontified as
function attributes?



Nathan

On 2 August 2018 at 13:53, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Which is fine. But can't we have a defface for this whose default
>> value is nil?
>> That way major-modes have one standard variable to use, and users have
>> one standard variable to customize.  I think that's a whole lot easier
>> for everyone.
>> Not to mention this puts the user in control of their own experience,
>> like Emacs should.
>
> Of course.
>
> I think the current design is strongly influenced by efficiency
> considerations rather than by someone deciding that those constructs
> shouldn't have their specific highlighting.
>
>>>> * attributes/annotations for functions, classes,
>>> I don't know what this refers to.  Which languages have those?
>> To be clear I meant annotations/attributes *applied to* function-
>> parameters, not function parameters itself.
>> In C# it can look like this:
>>
>>>     [DataContract]
>>>     public class QueryInfo
>>>     {
>>>         [DataMember(Order = 0)]
>>>         public int ContactId { get; set; }
>>>
>>>         [DataMember(Order = 1)]
>>>         public int PersonId { get; set; }
>>>
>>>         [DataMember(Order = 2)]
>>>         public int ProjectId { get; set; }
>>>
>>>         [DataMember(Order = 3)]
>>>         public int SaleId { get; set; }
>>>     }
>
> Ah, right, thanks.  I never use languages where this is used, but now
> that I see it, I do remember having heard of it.
>
>
>         Stefan
>