Feature request: implement vim syntax highlighting about cello HOT 10 CLOSED

Shouldn't this be a separate project?

from cello.

This task requires very few work. Just specify the new keywords in a .vim file, many other langs to the same until the highlighting rules get accepted into vim.

Vala for example ships the .vim file, and users are advised about using it, the script should check for libCello include file to recognize it as Cello, instead of plain C. So it is not only an extension check.

I think that file should be distributed with libcello

On Aug 4, 2013, at 23:45, "Brandon R. Stoner" [email protected] wrote:

Shouldn't this be a separate project?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

from cello.

In order to follow Vim conventions for plugin structure, you would need to throw it in as a Vim plugin at the root of the project.

It would seem odd to me to have a bunch of Vim stuff in the root of libCello. Most of the time when people merge Vim configurations with their project's source code, they end up in a situation where people who use Pathogen, Vundle, and NeoBundle are unable to use the plugins properly.

I'd hope that it'd be a separate repository, or this repository will get messy.

from cello.

Some projects (like Vala or acr) just put them somewhere inside editors/vim and install them in $pfx/share/vim/... On 'make install', i dont think those libcello should have those files at root directory and even i dont think it should be used as a vim plugin compatible with pathogen or so.

Just a readme with install notes or a make install target would work. At least until it finds it place inside the default vim distribution.

On Aug 5, 2013, at 18:50, "Brandon R. Stoner" [email protected] wrote:

In order to follow Vim conventions for plugin structure, you would need to throw it in as a Vim plugin at the root of the project. It would seem odd to me to have a bunch of Vim stuff in the root of libCello. Most of the time when people merge Vim configurations with their project's source code, they end up in a situation where people who use Pathogen, Vundle, and NeoBundle are unable to use the plugins properly.

I'd hope to avoid that.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

from cello.

The way that Vala and ACR do it is not a good idea. Just have a separate repository as a Vim plugin. Much more simple, much more flexible, much more predictable.

from cello.

A whole separate repo for a single repo looks bloated to me, but imho the only interesting part of the issue is the .vim file itself, not where it should be :)

On Aug 6, 2013, at 19:21, "Brandon R. Stoner" [email protected] wrote:

The way that Vala and ACR do it is not a good idea. Just have a separate repository as a Vim plugin. Much more simple, much more flexible, much more predictable.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

from cello.

I'm happy to include the .vim file in the root of the repo for now as we only have one other editor language definition currently there. If it starts to get bloated I can move them.

I don't actually use Vim much but perhaps someone who does will have motivation to make this.

from cello.

@orangeduck I don't think that a .vim file will work with the tools that I've mentioned. This is the conventional structure for a Vim plugin:

https://github.com/tpope/vim-dispatch

Putting it in .vim means that (assuming vim runtimes add .vim automatically) that the entirety of libCello is sitting in the user's Vim config directory for no reason (if they use a plugin manager for vim) and I'm sure that people who use other editors are going to want features like this someday.

Having it in the root doesn't necessarily seem like the best solution for Vim users, and now all the pull requests for the Vim plugin are coming in through libCello. Seems like some separation would be useful, but maybe I'm wrong.

from cello.

Separation looks fine to me. I've recently started using pathogen and seems quite straight forward. But should we first create a different repo with the basic files there?

Autocompletion looks also like an interesting feature that will come for free with the syntax file.

I just wanted to state that some users would like to have some vim sugar for it.

On Aug 7, 2013, at 22:17, "Brandon R. Stoner" [email protected] wrote:

@orangeduck I don't think that a .vim file will work with the tools that I've mentioned. This is the conventional structure for a Vim plugin:

https://github.com/tpope/vim-dispatch

Putting it in .vim means that (assuming vim runtimes add .vim automatically) that the entirety of libCello is sitting in the user's Vim config directory for no reason (if they use a plugin manager for vim) and I'm sure that people who use other editors are going to want features like this someday.

Having it in the root doesn't necessarily seem like the best solution for Vim users, and now all the pull requests for the Vim plugin are coming in through libCello. Seems like some separation would be useful, but maybe I'm wrong.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

from cello.

All that I've been saying is that I think that the Vim plugin should be in a separate repository. I apologize since it seems that I've miscommunicated that.

from cello.