The user had better avoid using the keystroke in a macro, but
when typing directly at a responsive machine there is no problem,
M-[ is a perfectly valid and recognizable keystroke.
This fulfills https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?58820.
A forward slash does not need to be escaped, and the backslash itself
should not be escaped: it serves to escape the star, to make it literal.
Also, remove a stray end-of-line anchor ($).
The modifier has to come before the foreground color name, separated
by a comma, and after 'bold,' (when present). This has no effect on
terminals that are incapable of cursive text, like the Linux console.
This fulfills https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?56525.
After a year or so, when people have had time to convert their syntaxes
to use 'bold' and/or 'light' instead of 'bright', we can drop this
colorizing, and still later stop recognizing 'bright' altogether.
The name 'bright' does not fit its effect (often bolding the typeface),
so better discourage its use.
Furthermore, colorize 'bold' and 'light' also for interface colors.
This makes it possible to avoid the misnamed prefix "bright". It is
misnamed because (on current terminal emulators, when the brightening
of bold is switched off) it just makes the typeface bold, not the color
brighter. The prefix "light" will now only make the color brigther,
and the modifier "bold" will just make the typeface bold (on terminal
emulators, when the brightening of bold is switched off).
On a Linux console, which is not capable of bolding the typeface,
"bold" will brighten the color.
This fully fulfills https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?58503.
The prefix "bright" will continue to make the color brighter AND/OR
make the typeface bold (depending on how the terminal is configured
and on its capabilities), but the prefix "light" will just make the
color brighter (if the terminal can do that).
The prefix "bright" continues to do the same as what it did before,
to not change the appearance of user-defined syntaxes. And having
an option to change the meaning of "bright"... would be confusing.
This partially fulfills https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?58503.
A long option should describe what it does, not vaguely hint at it.
Also, in several places of nano's code we deal with actual temp files,
and then having a flag called TEMP_FILE that doesn't have anything to
do with temp files is somewhat confusing.
Fortran and POV-Ray files are not found on any regular install of a
Unixy system nor in common software packages. People who want these
syntaxes will have to make a little effort to enable them.
Also, do not colorize the text between two stricken-through words,
do not colorize text immediately after an indented piece of code,
but do give color to a double trailing space.
Signed-off-by: Ryan Westlund <rlwestlund@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Benno Schulenberg <bensberg@telfort.nl>
Also, remove superfluous parentheses, add missing edge-of-word markers,
correct the "ppciseries" keyword, and fold some regexes (or elements of
them) together.
In RPM 4.15, a number of new spec section features were introduced:
* %dnl - macro-engine level comments
* %elif, %elifos, %elifarch - 'else if' stanzas for conditionals
* %sourcelist - section for listing sources line by line
* %patchlist - section for listing patches line by line
* %generate_buildrequires - script section after %prep for
generating build dependencies
(Reference: https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.15.0.html.)
An enhancement added in RPM 4.13:
* Sections for file trigger stanzas
(Reference: https://rpm.org/user_doc/file_triggers.html.)
As these are being increasingly used in Fedora and other distributions,
it's quite helpful to have syntax highlighting be up to date on handling
them.
Signed-off-by: Neal Gompa <ngompa13@gmail.com>
Since ^@ is rebindable too and also a synonym of ^Space, it makes
more sense to allow the user to specify ^` instead, as it is an
unshifted keystroke on US keyboards.
Also, color ^` as valid in a nanorc file, and color ^` and ^@ in
the help viewer.
The word "fixer" sounds too much as if the command would be able
to fix mistakes or correct errors. Especially when seen next to
"linter", it sounds as if one does a syntax check and the other
fixes the found mistakes. (Although the command might in theory
be used for this, it is not its intended purpose.)
Benno Schulenberg