* Felix Rosencrantz <f.rosencrantz@gmail.com> [Dec 12, 2004 14:09]:
> Some of the characters like "|<>" were being highlighted as yellow in
> a variable reference like ( found in _files:71) eval "def=(
> ${${def:gs/\\:/\\\\\\\\\\\\:}//(#b)([][()|*?^#~<>])/\\${match[1]}})"
> another one from _path_files:165 that confuses it:
> tmp3="${${(M)SUFFIX%\([^\|\~]##\)}[2,-2]}" Here's a line that seems to
> confuse it from _nslookup
> "${(@)^${(@)${(@M)setopts:#\(*}/\)/)-}/\(/(-}" \

This all leads me to believe that substitutions shouldn't be highlighted
at all; it's just to complicated to get right.  At least we're able to
match well-nested stuff, but 

	${(@)^${(@)${(@M)setopts:#\(*}/\)/)-}/\(/(-}

is just too weird.  It's a bugger that it highlights too much, though.
Suggestions?  I guess that if there was a good way of matching stuff
like
	${var/pat/sub}
	     ^^^^^^^^
one could figure out that this could contain unescaped parentheses and
so on...

> Also the `` embedded in double quotes doesn't seem to highlight
> properly.

Fixed.

> Also, it might be nice if well known functions like the completion
> functions (e.g. _arguments)  are highlighted, like it does with
> builtin variables.

That's getting a bit out of hand.

> A free standing -, or one that is in the middle of a word seems to
> turn red...

Yeah, it's the pre-command modifier.  Perhaps we should simply ignore
it.

> The syntax file doesn't handle here-strings "<<<" syntax.  (see:
> http://zsh.sunsite.dk/Doc/Release/zsh_6.html#SEC28) 

Well, it highlights the <<<.

> Thanks Nikolai, this is useful.

NP,
	nikolai

-- 
::: name: Nikolai Weibull    :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
::: born: Chicago, IL USA    :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden    :::
::: page: www.pcppopper.org  :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}