> The problem with the C++ example is that `setter`, `getter`, `indexer` are > types not functions, they should be highlighted as types. Whilst > `pl::Path::root`, pl::Path::segment` and `pl::Path::scheme` are functions and > should be highlighted as such.
Well, we're again asking what the changes proposed here are supposed to highlight: functions or calls. IMO highlighting calls is fine, whether it's a constructor or a function, and not highlighting functions/members used as value is fine too. But depending on what you see in the feature, you could indeed argue only functions should be highlighted, irrespective of whether they are called or not, and constructors shouldn't. Really, before continuing and showing cases and arguing whether it's right or wrong, we should sort this out. What is this supposed to do in each one's opinion? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/geany/geany/issues/1231#issuecomment-247554200
