* Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-05 17:57]:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 06:01:44PM -0500, David T-G wrote:
> > ...and then Jim MacBaine said...
> > > I'm regularly recieving perl and java programs
> > > and I have to sort out "the good from the bad".
> >
> > The perl sounds fun, but I feel for you for the java junk ;-)
>
> At least java has a well-defined grammar which makes it easy to parse.
> (perl, otoh...)
Perl parser? Sure, look at perly.c and toke.c in the perl source...
> I haven't seen a syntax highlighter for perl that handles all of perl
> (counting vim, vile, emacs).
As a professional perl programmer, I have to say that I've found vim to
be the least deficient in parsing perl syntax. Better than Emacs'
cperl-mode (not a flame, and observation!) and light year's better than
anything else (have you how atrocious enscript's syntax highlighting for
perl is?). The things most highlighter seem to have a problem with
(inculding emacs) is POD, regexes, and the alternative quoting mechanisms.
> Perhaps that should be a feature of perl 6.
Actually, it is.
(darren)
--
We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and
to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful
and his children smart.
-- H.L.Mencken
