looks bogus. just comment it out with an explanation.
Charles G Waldman wrote:
Can anybody explain to me the intention of the ***marked** line in
the
code fragment below?
(defvar compilation-font-lock-keywords (purecopy
(list
'("^[-_.\"A-Za-z0-9/+]+\\(:\\|, line \\)[0-9]+:
\\([wW]arning:\\).*$" .
font-lock-keyword-face)
'("^[-_.\"A-Za-z0-9/+]+\\(: *\\|, line \\)[0-9]+:.*$" .
font-lock-function-name-face)
***'("^[^:\n]+-[a-zA-Z][^:\n]+$" . font-lock-doc-string-face)***
'("\\(^[-_.\"A-Za-z0-9/+]+\\)\\(: *\\|, line \\)[0-9]+" 1
font-lock-string-face t)
'("^[-_.\"A-Za-z0-9/+]+\\(: *[0-9]+\\|, line [0-9]+\\)" 1 bold t)
))
"Additional expressions to highlight in Compilation mode.")
Seems to me that this winds up highlighting WAY too much
stuff... pretty much any line with a hyphen in it, and no colons.
It winds up giving ugly results - for instance, if you do a recursive
make, and some directory names have hyphens, you get messages like
Entering foo-bar
getting highlighted, but messages like
Entering baz
are not, it just winds up looking inconsistent and random. I'd like
to remove this piece of compilation-font-lock-keywords, but I'd like
to understand why it's there, first.
--
Ben
In order to save my hands, I am cutting back on my mail. I also write
as succinctly as possible -- please don't be offended. If you send me
mail, you _will_ get a response, but please be patient, especially for
XEmacs-related mail. If you need an immediate response and it is not
apparent in your message, please say so. Thanks for your understanding.
See also
http://www.666.com/ben/chronic-pain/