Skip to content

syntax highlighting keyword modifier class #629

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
sethmaclean wants to merge 7 commits into
base: bug-fix-syntax-highlighting-return-statements
Choose a base branch
from
Open

syntax highlighting keyword modifier class #629

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
0a3d61e
added 'keyword modifier' class to highlight 'optional' keyword in the…
sethmaclean Mar 5, 2025
da81885
Build class scope
TwitchBronBron Mar 21, 2025
3da00e9
Merge branch 'master' into syntax-highlighting-keyword-modifier-class
sethmaclean Mar 24, 2025
5aa113d
removed keyword modifier references
sethmaclean Mar 24, 2025
4b78cd9
Merge branch 'bug-fix-syntax-highlighting-return-statements' into syn…
TwitchBronBron Mar 24, 2025
2791274
changes started
sethmaclean Mar 25, 2025
6ab9e8f
more changes to test logic
sethmaclean Mar 26, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
18 changes: 17 additions & 1 deletion syntaxes/brightscript.tmLanguage.json
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -79,6 +79,9 @@
{
"include": "#keyword_logical_operator"
},
{
"include": "#keyword_modifier"
Comment thread
sethmaclean marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
},
{
"include": "#keyword_return"
},
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -649,6 +652,16 @@
"match": "(?i:\\b(and|or|not)\\b)",
"name": "keyword.operator.logical.word"
},
"keyword_modifier": {
"comment": "Capture modifiers that alter the declaration of a type of variable.",
"match": "(?i:\\b(optional)\\b)",
"name": "keyword.modifier.word",
"captures": {
"1": {
"name": "keyword.modifier.brs"
}
}
},
"keyword_return": {
"comment": "The return statements in functions",
"captures": {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -771,6 +784,9 @@
},
{
"include": "#interface_field"
},
{
"include": "#keyword_modifier"
}
],
"end": "(?i)[\\s\\t]*(end[\\s\\t]*interface)",
Expand All @@ -781,7 +797,7 @@
}
},
"interface_field": {
"begin": "(?i)\\s*\\b([a-z0-9_]+)(?:[\\s\\t]*(as))?",
"begin": "(?i)\\s*\\b([a-z0-9_]+)(?:[\\s\\t]*(as))",

@TwitchBronBron TwitchBronBron Mar 21, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we might want to add optional in this regex as an additional optional capture group rather than capturing it as its unique named item.

"beginCaptures": {
"1": {
"name": "variable.object.property.brs"
Expand Down