Re: Latest fix pack

Not sure what "style directives" are, or "tokens" for that matter (I do not
have your dictionary here).

They used to be differentiated as "Macro Keyword" (the first bit) and
"Macro Statement" (the following bits). What was wrong with that? Just
changing "Macro Statement" to "Free-form Identifier" doesn't help I
wouldn't think.

You can differentiate whatever you want (I edit in all black except for
comments), but DO NOT dump them in with other, meaningful things.
"Free-form Identifier"? Really? Makes it useless since you've dropped it
into a very large, very different category of identifiers.








On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Brian Johnson
<brian.johnson.mn@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Edmund Reinhardt <
edmund.reinhardt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

That is an interesting response. We were getting complaints about the
previous tokenizer not distinguishing between tokens, so we added this as
an enhancement. I would like to hear what others thing about style
directives. Should we make distinctions between tokens or not.

Never have cared about most of the 'tokens' (ditto others' comments about
selection and naming of tokens) offered for highlighting. And the default
color 'scheme' (has it really survived since CODE on OS2?!) is at best
unpleasant. I remove highlighting for all except comments. Then do it
again for ileRpgSql, a tedious process, repeated.

Glad to see quoted literal added for Rpg* tokenizers. I really liked that
option for CL where it really helps *highlight* unbalanced apostrophes.



--
Brian Johnson
brian.johnson.mn@xxxxxxxxx
--
This is the Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio
Client for System i & iSeries (WDSCI-L) mailing list
To post a message email: WDSCI-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.