source filename extensions

[Marcos Cruz]

Hi Lorry,

The ".spool" extension you provided in the file dialog made me think
what additional extensions would be useful.

I use ".fs" for Forth source files of most versions of Forth I use, but
recently I was considering a new extension for Ace Forth, in order to
automate the proper syntax highligthing association in Vim.

Anyway I think an option to filter standard extensions in the file
dialog will be helpful for cross-development. A single option "Forth
sources" to filter all most common extensions would be enough: ".4th",
".fs", ".f" and ".fth" (do I forget others?). In fact ".spool" could be removed, or is it
usual in other emulators? Maybe another option for text files (".txt",
maybe ".asc" too) would be helpful too.

But the question about a possible own extension for Ace Forth sources
still remains. I think it would be useful for cross development, in
order to write specifiec syntax highlight files and other addons for
text editors. They could be bundled with CanAce. I will contribute the
Vim stuff.

I like ".aceforth".

This an issue for the forum too. I wil post it there.

Marcos


--
http://programandala.net

[Marcos Cruz]

En/Je/On 2013-01-02 17:15, Marcos Cruz escribi� / skribis / wrote :

> I like ".aceforth".

Steve mentions ".ja4" in the information on UltraEdit and NotePad++:

http://www.jupiter-ace.co.uk/faq_TextSyntaxHighlighting.html

--
http://programandala.net

[Lawrence Woodman]

On 02/01/13 16:15, Marcos Cruz wrote:
> The ".spool" extension you provided in the file dialog made me think
> what additional extensions would be useful.

I think that .spool probably isn't all that useful and .fs and your
other suggestions are more suitable. I think these should again be put
in the config file and implementing this config file is probably my next
task.

Lorry


--
vLife Systems Ltd
Registered Office: The Meridian, 4 Copthall House, Station Square, Coventry, CV1 2FL
Registered in England and Wales No. 06477649
http://vlifesystems.com

[Marcos Cruz]

En/Je/On 2013-01-03 10:43, Lawrence Woodman escribi� / skribis / wrote :

> I think these should again be
> put in the config file

Good idea. No need to hardcode the filename extensions. The more things
in the config file, the more usable.

Marcos

--
http://programandala.net