Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes: > Amy Grinn <grinn....@gmail.com> writes: > >> How much does org mode modify the fontification for an indirect buffer? >> Without having looked into it, I assume not much or at all. >> ... I think >> that approach could be more complex, especially when dealing with a >> theoretically infinite number of major modes. > > Org mode does not _currently_ modify the code. But that's actually wrong > - things like escaped ,* or indentation sometimes also stay on the way > and produce incorrect fontification. So, rewriting the fontification of > src blocks to cleanup the code before fontification is long due. > noweb references is just another manifestation of this problem.
I think we're talking past each other a little. I'm not talking about changing the text content of a src block, I'm talking about modifying the syntax table of a major mode such as sh-mode to ignore or handle <<noweb>> syntax in an "edit-special" buffer. That was my interpretation of your suggestion of using fontification to solve this issue. And if that's the case, I foresee a lot of edge cases for modifying the display of major modes. >> Both solutions could be implemented at the same time. We could build on >> the existing functionality of the wrap-end and wrap-start variables >> while also looking at ways to modify the syntax highlighting without >> user intervention. > > I am not in favor of adding features that aim to serve as workarounds to > Org mode. This discussion is not about whether to allow users to modify noweb syntax. That feature is already a part of Org, well documented, and utilized. The feature request I'm making is to allow that modification to be done on a per-block level.
