[vim/vim] runtime(algol68): Update syntax file, match symbolic identity relators (PR #20109)

dkearns

unread,

May 1, 2026, 11:28:41 AMMay 1

to vim/vim, Subscribed

Match :=: and :/=:.

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109

Commit Summary

46fac9e runtime(algol68): Update syntax file, match symbolic identity relators

File Changes

(8 files)

Patch Links:

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Janis Papanagnou

unread,

May 1, 2026, 12:01:27 PMMay 1

to vim...@googlegroups.com

Just noticed that I don't see operators highlighted in my environment.

Q: Where will the condition exists("algol68_symbol_operators") get set
or when will it become defined, so that the highlighting gets activated?

________________________________________
Von: vim...@googlegroups.com <vim...@googlegroups.com> im Auftrag von dkearns <vim-dev...@256bit.org>
Gesendet: Freitag, 1. Mai 2026 17:28
An: vim/vim
Cc: Subscribed
Betreff: [vim/vim] runtime(algol68): Update syntax file, match symbolic identity relators (PR #20109)

Match :=: and :/=:.

________________________________
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109

Commit Summary

* 46fac9e<https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109/commits/46fac9ee6048c26e365e93e60ad70bdce65af4ec> runtime(algol68): Update syntax file, match symbolic identity relators

File Changes

(8 files<https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109/files>)

Patch Links:

* https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109.patch
* https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109.diff

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACY5DGCGJJX7J4A3AE7JWF34YS7B3AVCNFSM6AAAAACYNQ4AP6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZUGM3DKMJWGU4TKNQ>.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905> or Android<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details>.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: <vim/vim/pull/20...@github.com>

--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+u...@googlegroups.com<mailto:vim_dev+u...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/vim/vim/pull/20109%40github.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/vim/vim/pull/20109%40github.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

Christian Brabandt

unread,

May 1, 2026, 12:36:17 PMMay 1

to vim/vim, Subscribed

chrisbra left a comment (vim/vim#20109)

thanks

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Christian Brabandt

unread,

May 1, 2026, 12:39:01 PMMay 1

to vim/vim, Subscribed

Closed #20109 via e4413c5.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Janis Papanagnou

unread,

May 1, 2026, 6:12:38 PMMay 1

to vim...@googlegroups.com

Hi Doug,

I noticed that below mentioned if-condition was already present in
Nevilles' original version. I don't see a point in highlighting textual
operators but not highlight the symbolic variants. - Or what do you
think?

(There may be a point concerning all the Unicode variants we saw in
that version - these specific variants are unsupported by the Genie -
so they could be conditionally activated [in future] if/where possible.
But unless there's actual support from some compiler/interpreter I'd
remove the Unicode versions. - And then the conditional appears to
be unnecessary.)

Could we just remove the if-condition for the standard operators to
obtain them highlighted in Algol 68 source code? - Please let me
know what you think.

Thanks!

Regards,
Janis

________________________________________
Von: vim...@googlegroups.com <vim...@googlegroups.com> im Auftrag von Janis Papanagnou <janis_pa...@hotmail.com>
Gesendet: Freitag, 1. Mai 2026 18:01
An: vim...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: AW: [vim/vim] runtime(algol68): Update syntax file, match symbolic identity relators (PR #20109)

https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/20109

Commit Summary

File Changes

Patch Links:

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/DU0PR02MB10422C3A13EDBE6A6D7536BC7F3322%40DU0PR02MB10422.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com.

Doug Kearns

unread,

May 3, 2026, 12:24:29 PMMay 3

to vim...@googlegroups.com

Janis,

On Sat, 2 May 2026 at 08:12, Janis Papanagnou <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi Doug,

I noticed that below mentioned if-condition was already present in
Nevilles' original version. I don't see a point in highlighting textual
operators but not highlight the symbolic variants. - Or what do you
think?

Traditionally, symbolic operators have not been highlighted (e.g., the C syntax file). Some users like lots of highlighting, some don't, and some are very vocal about it either way. As a result there's not much consistency across the runtime files.

<snip>

Could we just remove the if-condition for the standard operators to
obtain them highlighted in Algol 68 source code? - Please let me
know what you think.

We could leave it as is, use a default value of true to highlight them, or remove the option altogether. There's about a dozen syntax files offering a similar configuration option.

I think this is a maintainer's decision. :)

Regards,

Doug

Janis Papanagnou

unread,

May 3, 2026, 1:42:39 PMMay 3

to vim...@googlegroups.com

Thanks for the information, Doug, it's quite useful for the "maintainer's
decision". :-)

While I'm not specifically liking "lots of highlighting" I think it's good
to have it consistent with the named standard operators. The defined
colors (for black and white backgrounds, respectively) also appears to
be not too "invasive". So I'd suggest we remove the option altogether
and have the operator-symbol highlighting *on*, defined as standard.

Would you be so kind to make this change? - Thanks!

Concerning:

"There's about a dozen syntax files offering a similar configuration option."

If you mean that it's *common* to allow a (interactive or by configuration)
explicit setting of highlighting behavior of this specific element then we
could _disable_ it by a conditional, but frankly, I don't see a point allowing
to configure every detail separately.

Regards,
Janis

PS: An interesting question is whether it's possible to highlight user-defined
operators and procedures. ;-)

________________________________________
Von: vim...@googlegroups.com <vim...@googlegroups.com> im Auftrag von Doug Kearns <dougk...@gmail.com>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 3. Mai 2026 18:23
An: vim...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: Re: [vim/vim] runtime(algol68): Update syntax file, match symbolic identity relators (PR #20109)

Janis,

Traditionally, symbolic operators have not been highlighted (e.g., the C syntax file). Some users like lots of highlighting, some don't, and some are very vocal about it either way. As a result there's not much consistency across the runtime files.

We could leave it as is, use a default value of true to highlight them, or remove the option altogether. There's about a dozen syntax files offering a similar configuration option.

I think this is a maintainer's decision. :)

Regards,
Doug

--

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+u...@googlegroups.com<mailto:vim_dev+u...@googlegroups.com>.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/CAJ1uvoB_pqbQp1Zu65QU84%3DOqcUc-fD-T-OUKk10QU-qrKu7gQ%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/CAJ1uvoB_pqbQp1Zu65QU84%3DOqcUc-fD-T-OUKk10QU-qrKu7gQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

Doug Kearns

unread,

May 6, 2026, 9:50:23 AM (14 days ago) May 6

to vim...@googlegroups.com

Janis,

On Mon, 4 May 2026 at 03:42, Janis Papanagnou <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for the information, Doug, it's quite useful for the "maintainer's
decision". :-)

While I'm not specifically liking "lots of highlighting" I think it's good
to have it consistent with the named standard operators. The defined
colors (for black and white backgrounds, respectively) also appears to
be not too "invasive". So I'd suggest we remove the option altogether
and have the operator-symbol highlighting *on*, defined as standard.

Would you be so kind to make this change? - Thanks!

Sure, I'll make the change in the next day or so. Please remind me if I forget.

Concerning:
"There's about a dozen syntax files offering a similar configuration option."
If you mean that it's *common* to allow a (interactive or by configuration)
explicit setting of highlighting behavior of this specific element then we
could _disable_ it by a conditional, but frankly, I don't see a point allowing
to configure every detail separately.

I was just pointing out that it wasn't a unique treatment. I think removing the configuration option is fine, even the Vim script syntax file unconditionally highlights both types of operators.

Regards,
Janis

PS: An interesting question is whether it's possible to highlight user-defined
operators and procedures. ;-)

In general, user-defined identifiers are not highlighted. They can be highlighted based on syntactic context but it's usually left to an LSP server that can limit the highlighting to valid identifiers. I'm unaware of an LSP server implementation for A68, that would be a good project.

Regards,

Doug

Janis Papanagnou

unread,

May 8, 2026, 10:35:12 AM (12 days ago) May 8

to vim...@googlegroups.com

Hi Dough, here's the reminder for the change, as you wished. :-)
Thanks!

Regards,
Janis

________________________________________
Von: vim...@googlegroups.com <vim...@googlegroups.com> im Auftrag von Doug Kearns <dougk...@gmail.com>

Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2026 15:49

An: vim...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: Re: [vim/vim] runtime(algol68): Update syntax file, match symbolic identity relators (PR #20109)

Janis,

Regards,
Janis

Regards,
Doug

--

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+u...@googlegroups.com<mailto:vim_dev+u...@googlegroups.com>.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/CAJ1uvoDOFiV2PAch4G_1QyhWUacHt6vKnGE8J896Uw14Vh5RyA%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/CAJ1uvoDOFiV2PAch4G_1QyhWUacHt6vKnGE8J896Uw14Vh5RyA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward