[Cuis-dev] Making assumptions about source code without checking #compilerClass

[Phil B]

A lot of the recent 'quality of life' improvements due to recent changes
have been great... when working with Smalltalk code.   On the other hand,
I'm working through some new issues re: OMeta as a result of some of the
recent updates and was wondering how to best handle them.

One specific example appears to be recent autoselect enhancements which
hard-codes the assumption that the AST will match what the user is seeing
on screen... often not the case with OMeta code.  (usually, it's not even
valid Smalltalk code when in source view)  The way we've handled this sort
of issue previously is to always check #compilerClass and have hooks on it
for things like #textStylerClass.  I'm not sure if we could/should wedge
the autoselect code into #textStylerClass or if a #codeWalkerClass type of
solution might be more appropriate.  But if we could do something that
works via #compilerClass, as opposed to hard coding the assumptions in the
editor, it would be greatly appreciated.   That way I can either override
or disable as appropriate for OMeta.

While my immediate concern is OMeta code, it also seems worth providing a
more general solution as it makes the text editing code more flexible for
everyone should someone else want to do the same sort of thing for
text/HTML/whatever editors.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20190522/76fb0332/attachment.html>