Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

typedef recognition (Suggestion) #1031

Closed
Morvalyn opened this issue Sep 13, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

typedef recognition (Suggestion) #1031

Morvalyn opened this issue Sep 13, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@Morvalyn
Copy link

It would be nice to be able to recognized custom typedefs..
an example is a simple struct with a custom typedef are all meta.block

typedef uint8_t U8;
typedef volatile uint16_t V16;

struct {
    U8 tmpCnt;
    V16 Cntr;
} Counter;
@sean-mcmanus
Copy link
Collaborator

I don't understand what you're asking for. Counter in your example has the type of an unnamed struct. You didn't add a typedef. The other 2 typedefs are recognized. What do you mean by "meta.block"?

@sean-mcmanus sean-mcmanus added Language Service more info needed The issue report is not actionable in its current state labels Sep 13, 2017
@Morvalyn
Copy link
Author

Sorry i didn't clarify enough. Syntax highlighting - but having it be recognized as type, highlights is the same meaning V16 is part of the meta.block and Cntr is also part of the meta.block (Themes (using the TM inspect tool (forgot exact name). So when doing custom typedefs they are not recognized by the syntax highlighter. Which means they are the same color, all custom typedefs dont actual changes colors or at least for the version I'm using I know this may sound somewhat trivial, but not have the styling for custom types, can sometimes throw you off. As for the struct it's a typo my apologies, it should have a typedef added. I'll update it so its correct.

@bobbrow
Copy link
Member

bobbrow commented Sep 14, 2017

This would be covered by issue #230, but since the textmate grammars are all regular expression-based, I'm not sure how we're going to be able to do this unless we can update the grammars on the fly (not something that we've tried yet).

@bobbrow bobbrow added duplicate and removed more info needed The issue report is not actionable in its current state labels Sep 14, 2017
@bobbrow bobbrow closed this as completed Sep 14, 2017
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 17, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants