Re: [PATCH] Re: Algorithm in electric-pair--unbalanced-strings-p unsuitable for CC Mode

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 09.07.2019 13:54, João Távora wrote:

> How can this be disparagement? It's a simple statement of fact. If you 
> didn't
> break things, what did you fix and what are you fixing?  Is "break" the
> word that you associate with disparagement, maybe? I admit it's a word
> that I hear very often in software engineering, I didn't invent it.

Since the "correct" behavior is a matter of interpretation here, who 
broke what is a matter of interpretation. And I'm sure you can agree 
that "you broke XXX" can be interpreted emotionally. There's no real 
need to repeat that a few times, especially while certain someone is 
working on "fixing" it.

To get back to Clement's question (and maybe I'm just restating your 
opinion here), I think:

* Fontifying "broken" strings only until EOL might be beneficial, at 
least in certain languages, where it's consistent with the syntax. The 
result will be less "blinking".

* It doesn't seem trivial to implement without breaking a lot of 
pair-matching and quote-matching functionality, because both font-lock 
and the latter features depend on parse status, and buffer can be 
fontified in chunks, etc.