JV <[email protected]> writes:

> Ihor Radchenko wrote:
>
>> Well. org-context uses group 2.
>> And who knows about third-party code.
>
> You're right. And this causes a bug. org-context does not return 
> :item-bullet for asterisk bullets.
>
> As best I can tell, the intent of the current design is for org-item-re 
> to quickly determine whether something is a list item, and 
> org-list-full-item-re to match its individual components. Any uses of 
> match groups other than 0 for org-item-re should likely be using 
> org-list-full-item-re instead.

You are right both about the bug in org-context (org-context is broken
in general) and likely about the intent of org-item-re.
However, our general rule is that breaking changes should be justified
by something more than just making the intent more clear.
In this particular case, I do not see a strong justification to
introduce potentially breaking change.

>>> This may be simpler than I thought. It seems checkbox fontification
>>> already uses org-list-full-item-re. We can just add another subexp
>>> highlighter to this. A faster regexp would be nice, but it only makes
>>> sense if it could completely replace the slower one for font locking.
>> 
>> +1
>
> One thing to note is that org-list-full-item-re is static. It always 
> matches using the most expansive values of org-list-allow-alphabetical 
> and org-plain-list-ordered-item-terminator. Do you think this is 
> acceptable for fontifying list bullets?

We can confirm with org-element-at-point, but I would not see using
slightly inaccurate regexp as a huge problem here. Simply because
fontification is already approximate and regexp-based. Adding yet
another approximate regexp-based keyword is ok-ish.
Eventually (I hope), we should switch the fontification to be
parser-based. Before that, we just accept the inaccuracies.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode maintainer,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Reply via email to