[texworks] \begin{document} in colour

[kap4lin]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Stefan Löffler <st.loeffler at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2010-01-20 18:39, kap4lin wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 7:05 AM, Stefan Löffler <st.loeffler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> However, the current approach is the simplest one (some would say it's
>>> not so simple at all with the complex regexp syntax and all) possible.
>>> Any other approach would probably require considerable amount of code
>>> and would also make the style definitions more complicated.
>>>
>> Yeah, I realized that. I was thrilled at first with the regex usage
>> but it was too good to be so simple ;(
>>
>
> Mind you, in theory it would be possible to simply apply the regexp to
> the whole text (i.e., not line-wise). This would, however, require a
> huge overhead. Imagine a document with hundreds (if not thousands) of
> lines. You type one additional line (which you want highlighted). And
> then the app hangs for a few seconds in the attempt to match every
> regexp in your syntax-patterns to the whole document.
> Therefore, syntax highlighting is done line-wise. This is actually part
> of Qt, which calls the highlighter line-wise. Of course you could also
> look at adjacent lines, but then you run into the problem of how many
> lines you want to look at...

Yes, I can see the difficulty. Then, I guess the kate-part's (KDE)
syntax highlighting system works completely different from Qt's?
Because, I have seen kile work on multiple line, but not perceivably
slow.

>
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Stefan Löffler <st.loeffler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Support for showing the text in bold (e.g. inside \textbf) has been
>>> added recently.
>>>
>> Thus, I am interested in seeing how \textbf has been incorporated. The
>> logical idea would be, whenever you see the string '\textbf{' you will
>> have to look for the first unpaired un-escaped closing brace, '}'.
>>
>
> I think you misunderstood me here. What was implemented was that syntax
> highlighting specifications can now set simple font-related flags for
> the properties bold, italic, and underlined. There is currently no
> implementation of actually showing the content of \textbf in bold. All I
> meant to say was, as an example, that one could define a regexp to show
> the content of \textbf (or any other command, for that matter) in bold -
> with all the limitations that were discussed previously (namely the
> problem of line breaks and of the first closing brace).

Ah, I see. My bad. Never mind.

-- 
Regards
Kap4Lin
--------------------------------------
http://counter.li.org  #402424