cullmann closed this revision.
REPOSITORY
R216 Syntax Highlighting
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D23034
To: jpoelen, #framework_syntax_highlighting, dhaumann, cullmann
Cc: nibags, kwrite-devel, kde-frameworks-devel, LeGast00n, domson, michaelh,
ngraham, bruns, demsking, cullma
cullmann accepted this revision.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
REPOSITORY
R216 Syntax Highlighting
BRANCH
auto_fallthrough (branched from master)
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D23034
To: jpoelen, #framework_syntax_highlighting, dhaumann, cullmann
Cc: nibag
cullmann added a comment.
Some whitespace stuff, git diff -w looks OK.
REPOSITORY
R216 Syntax Highlighting
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D23034
To: jpoelen, #framework_syntax_highlighting, dhaumann, cullmann
Cc: nibags, kwrite-devel, kde-frameworks-devel, LeGast00n, domson,
dhaumann accepted this revision.
dhaumann added a comment.
I think this is much better. For KF6, we can remove it in the xml files as
well or so...
Besides that: why does the diff show so many changes even though it's just
about fall through? It makes the review harder (especially on a s
jpoelen updated this revision to Diff 63455.
jpoelen added a comment.
- don't modify the *.xml files to maintain the compatibility in older
versions of KF5
- langauge.xsd: accept only 1 or true for fallthrough attribute
REPOSITORY
R216 Syntax Highlighting
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
http
jpoelen added a comment.
I will hand over the original xml files, that seems preferable to me too.
I did not see `fallthrough="false"` nor `fallthrough="0"`. But after
checking, `brightscript.xml` uses` fallthroughContext` twice without
`fallthrough`. in my opinion, it's an oblivion with
cullmann added a comment.
Sounds like a reasonable solution.
REPOSITORY
R216 Syntax Highlighting
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D23034
To: jpoelen, #framework_syntax_highlighting, dhaumann, cullmann
Cc: nibags, kwrite-devel, kde-frameworks-devel, univerz, LeGast00n, domson,
nibags added a comment.
I think it's an improvement, but the ideal would be to maintain support for
`fallthrough="bool"`. That is, if the `fallthroughContext` attribute is
present, assume `fallthrough="true"`, unless "fallthrough=" is explicitly
written.
What I don't agree with is modif
cullmann added a comment.
Hmm, isn't any file with some fallthrough=false but a fallthrough context
just buggy? Did any of our files have that?
REPOSITORY
R216 Syntax Highlighting
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D23034
To: jpoelen, #framework_syntax_highlighting, dhaumann, c
dhaumann requested changes to this revision.
dhaumann added a comment.
I like this change a lot, but there is a huge (theoretical) backwards
compatibility issue with this.
Before, the code ignored `fallthroughContext` if `m_fallthrough` was
explicitly set to `false`. So you could have: f
cullmann requested changes to this revision.
cullmann added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
I appreciate the removal of the fallthrough=bool attribute.
Given it is sematic-free if no fall through context is there I guess this is
a "compatible" change.
But please u
jpoelen created this revision.
jpoelen added reviewers: Framework: Syntax Highlighting, dhaumann, cullmann.
jpoelen added projects: Kate, Frameworks.
jpoelen requested review of this revision.
REVISION SUMMARY
fallthrough="true" is redundant with fallthroughContext="xxx" and there is no
reason
12 matches
Mail list logo