Trey Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [cperl-mode.el] As you already noticed cperl-mode.el is a very strange piece of software. It's probably misunderstood like astronomers in the Dark Ages.
> Variables with twigils whose name matches something else are getting > recognized incorrectly. For example, $.x is getting interpreted as > $. followed by the x operator, $.system as $. and system, and so on. I already tried to do something about twigils and the dot syntax ($.foo, %.foo, ...) *should* already work. If not, I might have introduced bugs during rather strange merge sessions with original cperl-mode that sometimes happen. First you could try an older revision, I recommend r7845 or r10822 of pugs repository. Second, there are known issues with two, hm, how to say?, "different highlighting models" that seem to rival each other. Bind a key to re-fontify and see what happens. In my emacs config I use (global-set-key [f3] 'font-lock-fontify-buffer) and pressing f3 corrects the wrong highlighting. I don't know why that's the case. Dark Ages are calling. > Can anyone help fix cperl-mode with twigils? I will help, I already have some kind of that "thousand yard stare" when I look at it. I'm only just in the middle of one of those "lack of time" phases. Generally I currently feel quite alone with my patches. I already contacted local lisp heros in my town but they say: start to refactor some things (even with concrete code suggestions), but I didn't implemented them because of drifting away from original cperl-mode. Incorporating my patches is difficult because of at least one huge, silly copy'n'paste hack to make the new regex syntax possible. And my Lisp-Foo an not match with the "officialness" and the extreme backwards compatibility demands of the original cperl-mode. *Maybe* a clear fork away from the original cperl-mode would make sense. We could refactor with the help of other lisp coders and throw away backwards compatibility issues we don't know about. But it's a very big "maybe". Having one mode for all perl versions and for both major Emacs variants with high backwards compatibility is a big plus and there is much knowledge in original cperl-mode that progresses itself, even as we speak. Currently I wouldn't fork it. BTW, I work with XEmacs 21.4.7. What's your Emacs? GreetinX Steffen -- Steffen Schwigon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dresden Perl Mongers <http://dresden-pm.org/>
