[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

From: Glenn Morris
Subject: Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 15:23:13 +0100
User-agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/)

Daniel Pfeiffer wrote:

> I don't know where that came from. This worked right when I did it,
> then a change in the Emacs display engine (something about overriding
> face attributes) seemed to have broken it, but before I found time to
> analyse and report it, it was working right again.

I don't know what you mean by "working right again". It's broken for
me in the current CVS.

Oh, hang on, I see. It's another one of those wonderful things where I
have to switch to "Gnumakefile".                 

> This is correct, because ifdef et al. are not keywords for make!

Others have commented on this, and FWIW I agree with them.

> If you don't think the extra information font-lock gives to the eye
> serves any useful purpose, don't use it.

I'm not going to. I'm going to spend my time customizing make-mode to
make it look how it used to, because I think the new defaults are so

>>The "-" before "rm" gets highlighted in font-lock-type-face. This is
>>just silly.
> It's definitely not part of the command, so it must look different!

"must" is a bit strong here, don't you think? I've lived quite happily
for years without this. Personally, I'm sticking with my "just silly"
assessment! :)

I think we want different things from font-lock. I want certain
important features highlighted, you seem to want almost everything
highlighted. Or else we disagree about the definition of "important".

> I don't know why, but when I took over makefile mode, single
> character variables were already highlighted differently from
> parenthesized multiletter ones. I feel that to be wrong, but I
> didn't care since in makepp every single character variable has a
> long alias which I always use, so I don't see these.

How wonderful for you. The rest of us should just sort ourselves out
then, should we?

> As for target face, that is an additional face for $@ because it's
> not only a variable but also the target. That's why it's underlined,
> so it can be combined with variable face, which has a foreground
> colour and shell face, which has a background colour.

Three different kinds of font-locking in the same place?!
Net result: nausea.

We're basically arguing over defaults, which seems to be generally
fruitless. I just found the new ones so bad, I was motivated to say

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]