Improve Julia definitions

ararslan commented 6 years ago

The Julia definitions here are partially incorrect (we've never had a super keyword, for example) and very out of date. Some of this was addressed in #912, but I've opened this issue to track remaining items.

Still to do:

[x] Add more Base types to TYPES
[ ] Recognize short form function definitions (e.g. f(x) = ...)
[ ] Fix module prefixed function definitions (e.g. function A.f(...))
[x] Highlight macro name definitions like functions
[ ] Recognize postfix ' adjoint as an operator
[ ] Triple quotes and triple backticks
[ ] Recognize symbols

Possible:

[ ] Highlight function and macro calls by context

pyrmont commented 5 years ago

@ararslan Is it possible to update your quite helpful to-do list in light of #1024 being merged in. What's left do you think?

ararslan commented 5 years ago

Unfortunately #1024 only checked two of the above boxes, so what's left is the rest of the list. :grimacing:

pyrmont commented 5 years ago

Hey, one step at a time, right? :) Thanks for #1024!

stale[bot] commented 2 years ago

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any activity for more than a year. It will be closed if no additional activity occurs within the next 14 days. If you would like this issue to remain open, please reply and let us know if the issue is still reproducible.

ararslan commented 2 years ago

AFAICT the items laid out in this issue still apply.

rouge-ruby / rouge

Improve Julia definitions #934