[ruby-talk:6695] Re: Syntax highlighting in XEmacs [LARGE]

"Conrad Schneiker" <[e-mail]> writes:

> use gvim (www.vim.org). ... And then I put ":syntax off" in my _gvimrc 
> (Win NT) and .gvimrc (AIX) files to suppress syntax
> highlighting. :-)

Luddite ;-)

>  Which brings up the question of why does the Ruby FAQ give a link to one 
> Vim syntax file, while Vim5.7 ships with a different syntax file? (I 
> suspect the answer is because Vim5.7 is fairly recent, and Vim5.6 didn't 
> have a Ruby syntax file.)

I guess the FAQ needs an update. Thanks

 
> Which brings up the question of how the Emacs syntax highlighting scheme 
> differs from the 2 Vim schemes. Is there any chance of a common 
> consolidated scheme? As color slowly becomes ever more seemingly 
> semi-omni-present in documentation, it might be nice to have a single 
> common scheme of code coloring for editing and documentation. 

In emacs, colors aren't decided by the language mode, but by the
user. For example, the ruby-mode file might define that Ruby comments
should be presented in 'font-lock-comment-face', and that's all. The
user can then set preferences for 'font-lock-comment-face' to suit
their tastes and fading eyesight. Typically, then, all comments are
displayed in the same face for all languages for a particular user, my 
mt emacs will look totally different to Matz's.

> Finally, out of curiosity, do most people that use syntax
> highlighting also normally use dark text on a light background, or
> light text on a dark background?

No idea. I tend to use dark backgrounds: attached is a gif of my emacs
editing a Ruby file.


Regards


Dave