Re: [Caml-list] Vim syntax supporting first-class modules?

[Anthony Tavener <anthony.tavener@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1638 bytes --]

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Markus Mottl <markus.mottl@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Anthony Tavener
> <anthony.tavener@gmail.com> wrote:
> > After first-class modules were introduced there were some questions
> whether
> > anyone had updates for ocaml.vim.
> >
> > About one year later I finally have use for first-class modules but can't
> > find Vim syntax support. Spend a couple hours now delving into the
> arcana of
> > syntax and particularly the module section of ocaml.vim. I've turned back
> > for fear of my sanity.
> >
> > Has anyone else slain this beast already? :)
>
> Though Vim has fairly powerful syntax highlighting features, its
> highlighting language is also not exactly easy to reason about.
> Frankly, a lot of my syntax file, which is probably what you are
> referring to when speaking of insanity, was developed using a heavy
> dose of trial and error, especially when it comes to module syntax.
> Even before first-class modules it was far from perfect.  Feel free to
> risk your sanity and send fixes... ;)
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
> --
> Markus Mottl        http://www.ocaml.info        markus.mottl@gmail.com
>

Oh, I understand. Certainly I meant no slight on you! I can see how the
syntax definitions lead to a very complex state machine, and I'm often
surprised when the highlighting is correct in the face of complex
language features.

If no one else has, I might venture forward. Though I do wonder what
all those Vim folks at Janestreet are doing? I guess just suffer looking
at some confused highlighting in presence of first-class modules if they
are rare enough anyway.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2361 bytes --]