Hello Gasten, if the one on the wiki is the one I did some time ago, it does differ in a few things. Namely: 1. Standardization of UGen names. This is, old UGen names shouldn't be highlighted. So sinosc should not be highlighted but SinOsc. However, I found out today that that's not the case. I have to look into it again cause I may have touched something I didn't want to. 2. coloring is enabled for the newer UGens (analysis UGens and features, windowing, GenX and others) 3. time units are also colored (thus: samp, day, ms, etc and also 1::samp, 2::samp, etc.) 4. @ => and =^ 5. complex and polar numbers, thus #(1,2) and %(3, 4) should be highlighted altogether. 6. TODO and FIXME inside comments 7. better coloring for floating point numbers. I believe in the old version the dot wasn't highlighted, not sure though cause it's been a while I've been adding/changing things. 8. support for constants such as null, NULL and other minor things I cannot track/remember now. broken things I found so far: will try to fix them as soon as possible 1. \t \n are not colored when inside a string. 2. ugen names. Seems that I have disabled differentiation between upper case and lower case. Please, try it out and let me know if you find other broken features. And also if you have any wishes or ideas on where to improve it. By the way, looking at all the keywords that appear in the manual I found one I don't know what it is used for. This is, pure. Does anyone know what it is useful for? Eduard On Oct 30, 2007, at 3:59 PM, Martin Ahnelöv wrote:

tis 2007-10-30 klockan 09:07 +0100 skrev eduard aylon:

...

Hello list,

here's the new ck.vim for syntax coloring that I use and hope it is useful to others. Let me know if you think more features should be added or changed. I am not a vim expert, but I'll try my best. If vim users think it is good enough I will put it on the wiki.

Eduard

How does it differ from the one I've been keeping up to date that's on the wiki? I can see that's smaller. does it do the same thing?

http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php/Ck.vim

Gasten

_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

ons 2007-10-31 klockan 02:13 +0100 skrev eduard aylon:

Excuseme I didn't quite understand you cause I didn't know anyone was working on it and I now see you've been doing some work there. I think they both do sort of the same.

I'll keep myself updated on that link,

Well, actually, your seems to have just a tiny bit more features than the one currently on the wiki, and you seems to know what you're doing (I'm just copying and modifying blindly), so I think you should replace the one on the wiki with this one. If you want to. I'm attaching a new version of the one you sent in your first post, but with added support for the new "<--"-comments (line 126 and 129), and highlighting for +=>, and similar (however, it's also highlighting +=^. Is this correct, kassen, spencer, ge?) (line 187). One thing, though: For the markup of the complex numbers I'm using this regex: "\(%\|#\)\ze(". That'll make the # or % coloured if it's followed by a "(" (which is uncoloured). This makes the highlight look like the example-code in Perry, Ge and Rebeccas paper http://soundlab.cs.princeton.edu/publications/uana_icmc2007.pdf . What do you think? Cheers, Gasten

ons 2007-10-31 klockan 21:27 +0100 skrev eduard aylon:

On Oct 31, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Martin Ahnelöv wrote:

...

ons 2007-10-31 klockan 02:13 +0100 skrev eduard aylon:

...

Excuseme I didn't quite understand you cause I didn't know anyone was working on it and I now see you've been doing some work there. I think they both do sort of the same.

I'll keep myself updated on that link,

Well, actually, your seems to have just a tiny bit more features than

just tiny things, though

...

the one currently on the wiki, and you seems to know what you're doing (I'm just copying and modifying blindly),

not really. I'm just hacking Bram Moolenar's c.vim and fitting it to my needs. So keeping the c/cpp style with those features available in chuck and getting rid of those which are not.

...

so I think you should replace the one on the wiki with this one. If you want to.

I think other vim users should say something about this. In my opinion if you get use to and like a specific syntax coloring it is difficult to be comfortable again with a different one. So if yours was the one on the wiki, probably many others are using it. If I had known (it's my fault for not checking it) that someone was updating it, I would have worked on that. So I think we should wait for others to speak out.

True, true, but I seriously doubt that there is any more vim users on the list (well, not more than 3, anyway).

...

I'm attaching a new version of the one you sent in your first post, but with added support for the new "<--"-comments (line 126 and 129),

didn't you can use <-- to write comments.

It's pretty new (as of 1.2.1.0).

...

and highlighting for +=>, and similar (however, it's also highlighting +=^. Is this correct, kassen, spencer, ge?) (line 187).

I like to keep things separate. For me + and => are two different things and I wouldn't like them to be highlighted as if it were an "atomic" feature.

...

One thing, though:

For the markup of the complex numbers I'm using this regex: "\(%\|#\)\ze(". That'll make the # or % coloured if it's followed by a "(" (which is uncoloured). This makes the highlight look like the example-code in Perry, Ge and Rebeccas paper http://soundlab.cs.princeton.edu/publications/uana_icmc2007.pdf . What do you think?

In my ck.vim I highlight everything (so including # or % with parenthesis and the coma) as it is all one number. Just a matter of taste...

Anyway I'm attaching my newest ck.vim with the broken things I mentioned the other day been corrected.

Okay, we seems to have pretty different views on how it should look. I propose that we keep both files on the wiki - it would be a shame if any of them were lost. I'll update mine with the things I like in your ck.vim, and you can do what you want with yours. Gasten

tor 2007-11-01 klockan 12:40 +0100 skrev eduard aylon:

...

...

I think other vim users should say something about this. In my opinion if you get use to and like a specific syntax coloring it is difficult to be comfortable again with a different one. So if yours was the one on the wiki, probably many others are using it. If I had known (it's my fault for not checking it) that someone was updating it, I would have worked on that. So I think we should wait for others to speak out.

True, true, but I seriously doubt that there is any more vim users on the list (well, not more than 3, anyway).

Really? well, then many don't know what they are missing :-)

Well, it -at least- seems like most people use miniAudicle. I don't even think there are many people using Emacs.

...

...

...

I'm attaching a new version of the one you sent in your first post, but with added support for the new "<--"-comments (line 126 and 129),

didn't know you can use <-- to write comments.

It's pretty new (as of 1.2.1.0).

Oh, yes. I see that now in the VERSION file.

...

...

Okay, we seems to have pretty different views on how it should look. I propose that we keep both files on the wiki - it would be a shame if any of them were lost. I'll update mine with the things I like in your ck.vim, and you can do what you want with yours

ok, then.

This is probably better than arguing about how the highlighting should work. Gasten

Juan-Pablo Caceres wrote:

Martin Ahnelöv wrote:

...

Well, it -at least- seems like most people use miniAudicle. I don't even think there are many people using Emacs.

Is there any syntax coloring for Emacs out there?

http://www.google.com/search?q=chuck+emacs -Scott

On 11/1/07, Atte André Jensen wrote: I really love the idea of miniAudicle.

But I'm back in emacs because of indention, search, mousefree switch of buffers, mousefree copy/paste + the regular bag of emacs tricks.

I think [Ctrl] + [Tab] should work for buffer switching and you can highlight using [shift ] + [cursor keys], then copy&paste using the regular hotkeys, or am I missing something? Search&replace would be good, and auto completion too, I know for sure those are planned (or were at least, Spencer mentioned them). For me search&replace is the one that's the biggest advantage of more general purpose editors right now. At the moment the Mini is very good for quickly writing small things but as soon as we are talking larger multi-session projects the lack of search starts to become a issue. Yours, Kas.

Find/replace exists in the Mac version. Cocoa (Apple's primary GUI API) is a lot faster to develop with than wxWidgets, which is what we use on Windows and Linux, so that's why the Mac version generally has more features. Find/replace is definitely going to be in the next release of Linux/Windows miniAudicle, in any case. spencer Quoting Martin Ahnelöv :

tor 2007-11-01 klockan 21:29 +0100 skrev Kassen:

...

On 11/1/07, Atte André Jensen wrote:

I really love the idea of miniAudicle.

But I'm back in emacs because of indention, search, mousefree switch of buffers, mousefree copy/paste + the regular bag of emacs tricks.

I think [Ctrl] + [Tab] should work for buffer switching and you can highlight using [shift ] + [cursor keys], then copy&paste using the regular hotkeys, or am I missing something? Search&replace would be good, and auto completion too, I know for sure those are planned (or were at least, Spencer mentioned them).

For me search&replace is the one that's the biggest advantage of more general purpose editors right now. At the moment the Mini is very good for quickly writing small things but as soon as we are talking larger multi-session projects the lack of search starts to become a issue.

WHAT!? You can't search in mini? Ge! Isn't that, like, the first thing you implement after save/load-functions? Now I really understand why I gave up on it...

Oh, well... Auto completion is the coolest thing ever (if it's implemented in the right way)!

Not trashing, Gasten

_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

Kassen wrote: Let me say that I had no intention of bashing the mini. I love how it's coming along, I used it alot and eventually it'll be the app to use.

I think [Ctrl] + [Tab] should work for buffer switching

Doesn't work here...

and you can highlight using [shift ] + [cursor keys], then copy&paste using the regular hotkeys, or am I missing something?

No, that's better than I remembered...

Search&replace would be good,

Well it's hard to live without search. Forgot goto-line. Also more integration like click on error/warning in console and goto the exact place in editor (open file if not open) would be good for the mini. Of course emulation of emacs bindings would be great for a one-trick pony like myself .-)

and auto completion too,

That's gonna be hard to beat :-)

At the moment the Mini is very good for quickly writing small things

Agreed!

but as soon as we are talking larger multi-session projects the lack of search starts to become a issue.

Sure. But other things that can be done with vanilla chuck + scripting (simple bash will do) are hard to to in any one ide. -- peace, love & harmony Atte http://atte.dk | http://myspace.com/attejensen http://anagrammer.dk | http://modlys.dk

Don't make me write chuck-el. _Mark On Nov 1, 2007, at 4:51 AM, Martin Ahnelöv wrote:

tor 2007-11-01 klockan 12:40 +0100 skrev eduard aylon:

...

...

...

I think other vim users should say something about this. In my opinion if you get use to and like a specific syntax coloring it is difficult to be comfortable again with a different one. So if yours was the one on the wiki, probably many others are using it. If I had known (it's my fault for not checking it) that someone was updating it, I would have worked on that. So I think we should wait for others to speak out.

True, true, but I seriously doubt that there is any more vim users on the list (well, not more than 3, anyway).

Really? well, then many don't know what they are missing :-)

Well, it -at least- seems like most people use miniAudicle. I don't even think there are many people using Emacs.

...

...

...

...

I'm attaching a new version of the one you sent in your first post, but with added support for the new "<--"-comments (line 126 and 129),

didn't know you can use <-- to write comments.

It's pretty new (as of 1.2.1.0).

Oh, yes. I see that now in the VERSION file.

...

...

Okay, we seems to have pretty different views on how it should look. I propose that we keep both files on the wiki - it would be a shame if any of them were lost. I'll update mine with the things I like in your ck.vim, and you can do what you want with yours

ok, then.

This is probably better than arguing about how the highlighting should work.

Gasten

_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users