Re: [PEPr] +1 for Text::Text_Highlight
| From: | Alan Knowles | Date: | Wed, 14 Apr 2004 03:25:23 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PEPr] +1 for Text::Text_Highlight | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-27606@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
I'd rather it went in as HTML_Syntaxhighlight or something at present - then as it evolved into a more generic tokenizer toolkit.. then it could be broken apart (eg. HTML_Syntaxhighlight depends on Text_Tokenizer)
Regards
Alan
Greg Beaver wrote:
Richard York wrote:-- Can you help out? Need Consulting Services or Know of a Job? http://www.akbkhome.comI also don't find the name too intuitive as others also pointed out. Which is one of the reasons I didn't follow the proposal. To those ends, I'd be more in favor of calling it HTML_SyntaxHighlight.. or something along those lines.I am a big -1 for a package that can only do HTML syntax highlighting. That would be completely useless to phpDocumentor, and would be a package replacement for a 1-liner: highlight_string(). highlight_string() will be using CSS if it doesn't already, I remember commits to do this a month ago or more. if Text_Highlight is designed to do the abstract portion of highlighting (identifying related tokens and coloring them/doing xref links), then it is appropriately named. Greg