> Linda W, Fri 2011-12-09 @ 02:46:15-0800:
>
>> As for the red flagging...
>>
>> I thought it was for syntax errors? since it isn't a syntax error,
>> but merely an older standard, shouldn't
>> it not be flagged as illegal?
>>
> Yeah, it should probably be accepted as valid syntax by Vim despite its
> deprecation, since it does still work in the current bash 4.2. It's
> likely that the creator of the sh.vim syntax file just didn't know about
> that older syntax.
>
> The same goes for the for loop with braces, though I can't find any
> reference at all to that syntax online. Is that an older form as well?
>
> In any case, regardless of how Vim handles syntax highlighting in bash
> scripts, it's probably better in general to stick with the more widely
> accepted syntax for this sort of thing. If nothing else, it avoids
> confusing people who don't know about the undocumented versions when
> they read your code. :)
>
I think deprecated syntax should be flagged. However, I've uploaded
syntax/sh.vim v121 which has a new feature:
if you put
let g:sh_no_error= 1
into your .vimrc, you will no longer see error highlighting (with v121).
Regards,
Chip Campbell
--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
No comments:
Post a Comment