Hi, I've been using sh.vim for a few weeks. I don't edit that many bash
files, so ... But I came across the following problem which didn't seem
to be in the list of known bugs. In the following, the end of the "-r)"
line to just before the "esac" is highlighted as errors. If there are
not multi
And there's array assignment to a variable when declared local on the
same line
#/usr/bin/bash
local a=(x y)
On 5/25/2011 7:13 AM, Radek Nadstawny wrote:
Update, mostly bugfix
Bugs fixed:
* use of reserved word as a function name did not trigger an error
* [Bash] Arithmetic "for" variant wa
Update, mostly bugfix
Bugs fixed:
* use of reserved word as a function name did not trigger an error
* [Bash] Arithmetic "for" variant was recognised only on top level.
(thanks to sc for testing and spotting the bug)
* [Bash] "time" keyword couldn't be used as a separate command
* [Bash] when "f
On Tue, 24 May 2011 17:07:57 -0700
"George V. Reilly" wrote:
> If I go to the beginning of a line such as this:
>
> build_number=${build_number:-37} for standalone testing
>
> and type 'ye', it yanks everything up to the '}'. With the stock
> syntax highlighting, it just yanks 'build_numbe
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Radek Nadstawny wrote:
> Another update:
>
If I go to the beginning of a line such as this:
build_number=${build_number:-37} for standalone testing
and type 'ye', it yanks everything up to the '}'. With the stock syntax
highlighting, it just yanks 'build_n
On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 13:43:52 Gary Johnson wrote:
> Thanks for your work on sh.vim. I've installed it but I don't
> use it very often, so I won't be good source of feedback.
i'm using it, and so far so good -- will be glad to report back
if i find issues
sc
--
You received this message fr
On 2011-05-24, Radek Nadstawny wrote:
> I don't use ksh, but I know that some parts of POSIX as well as many
> Bash features were inspired by ksh, so it's likely that making this
> syntax ksh-compatible will be fairly easy. I would be honored if my
> sh.vim made it into the official Vim distributi
On Tue, 24 May 2011 07:23:08 -0700
Gary Johnson wrote:
> The current $VIMRUNTIME/syntax/sh.vim also has bash-specific and
> even ksh-specific constructs, so the name is consistent with current
> practice. On the other hand, if this sh.vim is to replace
> $VIMRUNTIME/syntax/sh.vim, it should also
On 2011-05-24, Jean-Rene David wrote:
> * Radek Nadstawny [2011.05.23 22:30]:
> [...]
> > * Added proper regex highlighting in Bash' compound conditionals
> >
> > * Added Bash' "time" keyword
>
> If this syntax file to include bash-specific constructs, then IMHO it
> should be called bash.vim, no
* Radek Nadstawny [2011.05.23 22:30]:
[...]
> * Added proper regex highlighting in Bash' compound conditionals
>
> * Added Bash' "time" keyword
If this syntax file to include bash-specific constructs, then IMHO it
should be called bash.vim, not sh.vim.
--
JR
--
You received this message from
Another update:
* Reworked highlighting groups - it's now much easier to customize
which highlighting groups are used by various kinds of syntax items
Example: you can make closing quotes highlight differently by only
adding "hi link shClosingQuote " to your
vimrc
* Added proper regex hig
Updated version. Changes:
* refactored 'for' loop - no functional change, just simpler code
* added arithmetic variant of 'for' loop
* set 'iskeyword' option using :setlocal, as Thilo suggested (thanks!)
Now, it seems that only regexes in Bash '=~' conditional remain for the
syntax to be complete.
On Sat, 21 May 2011 15:08:51 +0200
Lech Lorens wrote:
> The following fragments in my scripts get highlighted as errors:
>
> #v+
> #!/bin/bash
>
> if [[ "$1" = "--offset" ]] ; then
> true
> elif [[ "$1" =~ --offset=(.*) ]] ; then
> false
> else
> true;
> false;
> fi
> #v
On 21-May-2011 Radek wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I didn't like how the current highlighting for shell scripts behaved in
> certain situations, so I wrote my own syntax file. It supports
> POSIX-compliant (POSIX.1-2008) shell scripts and Bash (4.2.10).
>
> It's designed to be more syntax-driven than t
Radek wrote the following on 21.05.2011 03:29
> Hi there,
>
> I didn't like how the current highlighting for shell scripts behaved in
> certain situations, so I wrote my own syntax file. It supports
> POSIX-compliant (POSIX.1-2008) shell scripts and Bash (4.2.10).
>
> It's designed to be more sy
Hi there,
I didn't like how the current highlighting for shell scripts behaved in
certain situations, so I wrote my own syntax file. It supports
POSIX-compliant (POSIX.1-2008) shell scripts and Bash (4.2.10).
It's designed to be more syntax-driven than the current one (e.g. it
does not highlight
16 matches
Mail list logo
