• Renpy: folding sensitive to indentation

• add a comment

Perl: increase version... over and over again :)

• increase version

The other files that use the include statement are also in version 5.53.

If it is better not to have a hard-coded color, wouldn't it be better to remove them once and for all? Without necessarily incrementing the version.

I don't think using the original word delimiters is a good thing. Let's imagine that c.xml lists the functions of the libc and a language that allows them to be used as ffi.C.printf (luajit for the curious). The separators of the 2 languages are not the same and puts'plop' works for one, but not for the other. If we rely on the C delimiters, it will not work anymore. I think we can find other examples and perhaps counter-examples.

• add unit test

• increase version

I don't understand why there's so much difference in what's displayed :/

• don't modify the *.xml files to maintain the compatibility in older versions of KF5
• langauge.xsd: accept only 1 or true for fallthrough attribute

I will hand over the original xml files, that seems preferable to me too.

The 410477 did not exist when I started my modifications, I add it in the list.

At first, I didn't have much change. But as I broke my teeth on one of the bugs and there were some problems here and there, I armed myself with a bulldozer :D

increase the version number

After reflection (:D), I think the constraint is weak, the creation of new syntax is rare compared to the rest.

I am confused, the generation of index.katesyntax fails because the list "variables" does not exist (there is no variable predefined in this context). We may be in a situation where a change of branch does not recompile the index file :/.

oops, missing version increase

• fix module
• remove hard coded color

I left it because it goes well with dark or light themes, but I removed it. Is the policy the same for bold, underlined and italic as for color? Because a basic applied distinction between Comment and CommentTitle seems to me preferable. I imagine not, but I would like to be sure.

OK I understand. Initially I had not changed the version number of txsh.xml and it is based on the reference in /usr/share/org.kde.syntax-highlighting/syntax/index.katesyntax rather than in the repository.
And the fact that the versions in the index file were newer than my xml files... I had errors with highlight.fish.

I forgot to ask about running the tests. Is it normal that system syntax files take precedence if we have an index.katesyntax? Currently I have to run the tests by setting the environment variable XDG_DATA_DIRS.

I agree that some rules are excessive or even false, but the last time I watched (it was several months ago now), some regexes suggested to be DetectString seemed to have writing errors (mainly \\ count as 2 characters in xml) and some more or less useful propositions. If there has been no change at this level, it should still be checked.

• fix the recursion detection and handling of nested included keyword lists

(I inadvertently edit the operators list in the previous commit)

• restore operators list
• lazy load keyword lists

resolveIncludeKeywords() would then use loadKeywords() instead of load() ? This should be enough.

Sorry to answer so late, I had trouble logging in.

include rule in keyword list to import those from another file

Yes, my compilation folder was pointing to my fork on github from which I make the patches (as I do not have the right version for ECM, I have a script that does among other things a new CMakeLists.txt in another folder and adds symbolic links for project files). If there was no more error it was because I saw them in the conflicts.