Re: "Font-lock is limited to text matching" is a myth

[Miles Bader]

Steve Yegge <address@hidden> writes:
> V. Font Lock framework design problems
>
> There seems to be a common misconception flitting about to the
> effect that font-lock is perfect and will never need to change.

I don't think that's true at all -- I think most of us realize that
font-lock sucks.

On the other hand, most attempts to do ad-hoc highlighting also seem to
suck (this is always my initial assumption).

Since there's a _lot_ to be gained from using a common framework
(consistency, maintainability, etc), it's far preferable that packages
use a standard sucky framework, than their own sucky code.

Thus the tendency to approach any new package that doesn't use font-lock
with skepticism:  It isn't so much a vote of confidence in font-lock, as
it is a recognition that the alternative is _usually_ worse...

If that's not true in your case, then great -- as Stefan said, maybe
it's a good example of an alternative approach, and something that could
be used to experiment with possible future highlighting/parsing/etc
frameworks that do a better job than font-lock.

-Miles

-- 
Defenceless, adj. Unable to attack.