(brainstorm) munge(syntax_files, ASTs) => possibilities.
hgs at dmu.ac.uk
Fri Nov 4 14:30:54 EST 2005
Two ideas just bumped together, and I wondered if they are
worth following up by those who are familiar with them.
People have projects for Ruby that take ruby syntax and produce
abstract syntax trees. These allow flexible manipulation of the
code. In particular, swapping bits around should be easier, and I
think this is what IDEs do.
I wanted to port the FIXME and NOTE highlighting from the Ruby
syntax file to the MySQL one, but foound that the references occur
in too many places for me to do so with any confidence at all.
So, my question is: Is it sensible to consider doing this sort of
manipulation with ASTs? Is it worth floating (a fleshed out?)
version of the idea on vim-dev or elsewhere? I'm thinking it might
make it easier for the vim-file maintainers to re-use code from
other files if the semantics can be encapsulated as well as the
syntax, but I don't actually know where to start with this.
More information about the vim-ruby-devel