Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
comp.lang.lisp
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion colouring identifiers (Ex: Re: Eli stuff)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Sunil Mishra  
View profile  
 More options Jan 1 1999, 3:00 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Sunil Mishra <smis...@whizzy.cc.gatech.edu>
Date: 1999/01/01
Subject: Re: colouring identifiers (Ex: Re: Eli stuff)
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

vniko...@poboxes.com writes:
> Personally, I am not sure at all if it is worthwhile; assuming it is,
> I am not sure if it should be done by colours---using different fonts,
> bold, italic, etc. might be better.  (The AppleScript editor on the
> Macintosh, which does it in this latter way, seems to be doing it well,
> though I have not used it quite a lot.)

> Second, if syntax highlighting is assumed worthwhile, I would say that
> the _syntactic_ features to be highlighted would include special forms
> and macros, possibly special variables and such, but semantic features
> (such as type names) should not be highlighted.

> Besides, with Lisp we have pretty printing, which in my view reduces
> the need for syntax highlighting.

One of my friends in usability pointed out that in some study, about the
only visual tool that turned out to be generally accepted as useful was
syntax highlighting. I personally have become so used to it that being
without it would make me far less productive. At least until I readapt. I
have practically given up on editing lisp programs over a vt100 terminal,
and find MCL inconvenient because I can't find a facility that does syntax
highlighting. (I did find one, but it inserted font codes into the text
document, which was not acceptable.)

Yes, having a tool figure out new forms to highlight would be nice. What is
already available however is in itself indispensable. I think a better long
term solution might be something that ties in with source code and project
management. Some way of defining a project in some ilisp like environment,
where parameters to font highlighting, among other things, can be specified
for the project as a whole, to be loaded into emacs.

Your milage, could (and does appear to) vary.

Sunil


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google