> My personal feeling is that we shouldn't use them in our conffiles,
Agree. I think that apart from the reasons mentioned above, it just looks nicer
in the conf file when all commented-out lines start with `#`.
> but that we should support them in the file type; I don't see any reason why
>
Merged #3428 into master.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/3428#event-8731951774
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
@b4n approved this pull request.
Looks good, as usual
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/3428#pullrequestreview-1337037364
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
> for example the parser accepts ; comments, and I didn't look again but I
> guess the lexer has similar extension that breaks your expectations of the
> highlighting being a validator or similar.
Scintilla accepts `;` as well, after all its the original comment in MS `.ini`
files, not `#`
> Given that Geany does not know what parser is going to be used my feeling is
> that Geany should not _by default_ encourage something that might not be
> legal.
I'm rather thinking the contrary, that Geany should support wider use cases so
long as it doesn break another one. And thus I would
> You seem to have a lot against leading whitespaces here, far beyond whether
> we should or shouldn't use them in these specific files, why is that?
Not a _lot_, but you are right, the point is beyond just Geany conf files.
There were, and possibly still are, a lot of things that used ini like
> Yes we should, to match the parser behaviour you note further on.
One thing I forgot to mention is that it's the same commit mentioned above that
also modified the parser not to allow leading whitespaces…
> Well the default value in Scintilla is 1 which matches the comment, but then
> Geany
@b4n
> Actually it [is valid for our purpose at
> least](https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/blob/main/glib/gkeyfile.c#L1277).
I already pointed that out
[here](https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/3413#issuecomment-1445242422) but as
I noted its _not_ documented. Relying on undocumented
> 1. The indented `#command_example();` in
>
> […]
>
> isn't a valid conf file line as `#` should be placed at the beginning of the
> line. This makes Scintilla to render `#command_example();` as if it weren't a
> comment. This patch changes this to
Actually it [is valid for our purpose at
