Re: cgit syntax highlight request

[Bruno Haible]

I vote for no color.

> Colors are one
> of those bike-shed items that everyone wants to be different.
> Therefore the common ground is often the no-color option.  I much
> prefer if people clone to their own sandbox and then they can use
> their own preferences for all bike-shed things like colors and fonts.
> But this is a shared resource and everyone is using it as a commons
> area.

Well said.

A wrong coloring is much more confusing than a correct coloring is helpful.
And a wrong coloring can occur when
  - a file name does not contain code in the programming language hinted
    by the suffix, or
  - the developers used syntax extensions (e.g. C macros, @FOO@ autoconf
    variables that get substituted, etc.), or
  - the coloring algorithm is too simplistic in the first place.

Even the URL that was brought up by the advocates of coloring
https://git.dthompson.us/guix-config.git/tree/takemi.scm#n165
shows deficiencies: In line 28, the identifier 'extension' is bold,
but in line 33 it is not.

Bruno