On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 16:20:34 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
> Here are the results on my Vim 7.3 on Linux:
> http://postimg.org/image/cgtkbhr0t/

Are you sure you didn't have merge errors, The only indicator that you have the latest file is the asm.d highlighting, and I can't reproduce this.

Anyone else seeing these?

On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 16:36:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> First question that I have:
>
> Does 'Object' *need* to be syntax highlighted?
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Iain Buclaw
>
> *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

No, but nor does size_t... Object is always made available, so basically a keyword.

On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 22:34:05 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 16:20:34 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
>> Here are the results on my Vim 7.3 on Linux:
>> http://postimg.org/image/cgtkbhr0t/
>
> Are you sure you didn't have merge errors, The only indicator that you have the latest file is the asm.d highlighting, and I can't reproduce this.
>
> Anyone else seeing these?

Oopsie... my fault...

I haven't really merged it or replaced the old file - I just `unlet`ted `b:current_syntax` and `source`d your syntax file, so I guess the two syntax files got mixed.

I removed the suffix from the example files and loaded just your syntax, and everything turned out OK!


Anyways, do you happen to know where we can get a proper indentation for D under Vim?

Thanks.

I've fixed cgdb syntax highlighting for various literals here.

https://github.com/cgdb/cgdb/pull/22

Wonder if anyone has any ideas for q"( strings )"

Regards
-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
On May 20, 2013 11:40 PM, "Jesse Phillips" <Jessekphillips+D@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 16:36:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
>> First question that I have:
>>
>> Does 'Object' *need* to be syntax highlighted?
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> --
>> Iain Buclaw
>>
>> *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
>>
>
> No, but nor does size_t... Object is always made available, so basically a keyword.
>

On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 22:51:52 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
> Anyways, do you happen to know where we can get a proper indentation for D under Vim?

Nope, most recent information I know is found here:
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?EditorSupport/VimEditor

On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 23:08:26 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> I've fixed cgdb syntax highlighting for various literals here.
>
> https://github.com/cgdb/cgdb/pull/22
>
> Wonder if anyone has any ideas for q"( strings )"
>
> Regards

In case you don't know (guessing you might not based on the comment):

q{ Token string here }

q"( custom wysiwyg string delimiter )"

The first should probably highlight as normal code (Vim is doing that). The second is a normal string.

The token string is interesting since it can be used to house non-D language making D not necessarily the proper highlighting scheme.... hmm I wonder if I could make vim.d identify the language (probably needs specific indicator though).

On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 23:20:08 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> The token string is interesting since it can be used to house non-D language making D not necessarily the proper highlighting scheme.... hmm I wonder if I could make vim.d identify the language (probably needs specific indicator though).

The standard says "In between must be valid D tokens", so I'm not sure that's actually the case.

On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 23:30:48 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
> On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 23:20:08 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
>> The token string is interesting since it can be used to house non-D language making D not necessarily the proper highlighting scheme.... hmm I wonder if I could make vim.d identify the language (probably needs specific indicator though).
>
> The standard says "In between must be valid D tokens", so I'm not sure that's actually the case.

That just means it can be tokenized; pretty much anything can be tokenized.

I was going to give an example of something that would fail... but I can't think of anything that should fail. My first thought was '45oau' since identifiers can't start with a number... but my testing shows this is accepted.

On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 23:57:21 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> I was going to give an example of something that would fail... but I can't think of anything that should fail.

A string in single quotes doesn't pass. I use it for inline javascript sometimes and hits this:

a.onclick = q{
   var a = 'something'; // this won't compile in D - it will have to use double quotes
   return false;
};

test.d(5): Error: unterminated character constant

On May 21, 2013 12:25 AM, "Jesse Phillips" <Jessekphillips+D@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 23:08:26 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> I've fixed cgdb syntax highlighting for various literals here.
>>
>> https://github.com/cgdb/cgdb/pull/22
>>
>> Wonder if anyone has any ideas for q"( strings )"
>>
>> Regards
>
>
> In case you don't know (guessing you might not based on the comment):
>
> q{ Token string here }
>
> q"( custom wysiwyg string delimiter )"
>
> The first should probably highlight as normal code (Vim is doing that).
The second is a normal string.
>
> The token string is interesting since it can be used to house non-D
language making D not necessarily the proper highlighting scheme.... hmm I wonder if I could make vim.d identify the language (probably needs specific indicator though).

The bit causing trouble is knowing the token that shall end the  string.

Regards
-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';