Re: 9.0.1 token colours

Maybe I'll be the controversial one here. I love having lots of detail
available in the tokenizing choices.

When I look at the Parser Styles, I click the item I want to change and
see what the parser calls it. Then, like Buck, I'll click the Outline box
to see what else would be affected by a change. I make any adjustments
based on that. But to turn massive amounts of stuff straight black
reduces the value of the IDE--just my opinion. I know color groupings
(tokens) doesn't always follow the thinking from a programmer's view of
the language. But I understand it from the tokenizer/parser's point of
view, The terminology for the tokenizer has to be rather generic (or
perhaps more accurately language-agnostic) since it really doesn't know
anything about the language.

The way the tokens are broken-up or grouped makes sense to me.

wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 12/17/2013 12:08:40 AM:

----- Message from Buck Calabro <kc2hiz@xxxxxxxxx> on Mon, 16 Dec
2013 15:40:13 -0500 -----

To:

wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject:

[WDSCI-L] 9.0.1 token colours

<created a new thread>

Edmund said:

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.

I'm probably going to be the controversial one in this thread. I've
never cared for the choices I have with the token colours. For those
following along, open the colour picker up: Preferences > LPEX Editor >
Parsers > Parser styles.

I agree with Vern: the nomenclature for the RPG tokeniser doesn't match
what RPG programmers think about tokens. Click on 'User Symbol' and
then click the check box to the right labelled 'Outline'. Now you can
see what 'User Symbol' refers to. F-spec file name, D-spec variable
name, I-spec file name, I-spec field name, C-spec factor 2, O-spec
EXCEPT name, O-spec field name, O-spec constant, P-spec procedure name,
D-spec procedure name. There may be more, because the Preview box
doesn't have the full suite of RPG specs - for example, there are no
extended factor 2 EVAL statements, and 'Macro Statement' is
unrepresented. Anyway, as an RPG programmer, there's no possible way I
would ever think of factor 2 the same as a file name the same as an
O-spec constant. That token - 'User Symbol' - is way overloaded to be
useful to me. So I changed it to black.

Unclick Outline and click User Symbol2, then click Outline again. This
one is factor 1 and the result field. Not nearly as overloaded as User
Symbol, but as an RPG guy I'd way rather know when things are getting
changed - result field - than overloading result with factor 1. Changed
colour to black.

Keyword. Holy cow. When I click Outline, it seems like half the
Preview has boxes. Changed colour to black.

What is the difference between Numeric and Numeric2, and why aren't
array indices [ARRAY(1)] considered numeric but F-spec record lengths
are? Black and black.

The compile time arrays are interesting. The first 5 characters are
colourised as 'Comment' and the remaining characters are 'Data'. Since
I like my comments to stand out, I'm forced to change 'Data' to match.
I make mine a sort of purple. Do those colours have names?

In the end, the only colours I have are indicators (I want the weeds to
stand out), BIFs, opcodes and comments. The reason I'm writing is
because Edmund asked, and I thought the team should know how one (very
old, ahem I mean experienced) user treats these colour choices.
Clearly, they aren't that important to me, but I definitely respect the
opinion of those who differ. As long as I can set them to black, I'm
happy :-)

--buck