Fix meta.catch.java and meta.throwables.java scopes

[sadikovi]

Requirements

• Filling out the template is required. Any pull request that does not include enough information to be reviewed in a timely manner may be closed at the maintainers' discretion.
• All new code requires tests to ensure against regressions

Description of the Change

This PR updates the code for scopes meta.catch.java and meta.throwables.java and fixes scoping of exception class names and/or parameters.

For meta.catch.java we are currently include parameters scope, which is not exactly correct, because parameters are assumed to be storage + variable, but in the case of catch block, you could see something like this Exception1 | Exception2 err, so we would only highlight the second case. I replaced it with the pattern that scopes | as separator and require storage and optional variable name.

For meta.throwables.java we are currently including object-types scope, which is also not 100% correct, because they assume storage followed by variable, but in throws you could see something like this throws Exception1, Exception2. I changed it to just parse storage type.

class MyClass {
  public void set(String str) throws Exception3, Exception4 {
    try {
      // some code
    } catch (Exception1 | Exception2 e) {
      throw new Exception3();
    }
  }
}

Before:

After:

Alternate Designs

I was considering updating parameters and object-types scopes, but I found that it would be rather massive change, which might cause the regression in other parts. So I went with this fairly straightforward approach.

Benefits

Fixes issue of scoping exceptions in catch and throws.

Possible Drawbacks

None that I found, it does not affect existing scopes.

Applicable Issues

Closes #138

[sadikovi]

@50Wliu could you have a look at this PR? Thanks!

[winstliu]

.java

[winstliu]

Should it be (\\w+)? instead?

[sadikovi]

Yes, you are right. I will update the code.

[winstliu]

.java

I also think this can use the standard comma separator scope.

[sadikovi]

Yes, you are right. Will update.

[sadikovi]

@50Wliu thanks for review! I updated the code, would you mind taking a look again? Thanks.