Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 15, 2022. It is now read-only.

Recognize source keyword in grammar (for Gemfiles) #149

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 24, 2016
Merged

Recognize source keyword in grammar (for Gemfiles) #149

merged 1 commit into from Jun 24, 2016

Conversation

caleb531
Copy link
Contributor

@caleb531 caleb531 commented Jun 23, 2016

Hi,

I recently starting learning about and working with Gemfiles in one of my projects. However, I noticed that while the language-ruby package nicely highlights the gem keyword in my file, it does not highlight the source keyword, which is (as far as I can tell) common to most Gemfiles (see the first snippet on the Bundler homepage)

Gemfile in Atom

With my simple tweak to the grammar to fix this, all tests are still passing, though I didn't think it was necessary to add an additional unit test (and if so, then you might as well add unit tests for all of the other syntax-highlighted keywords).

Anyway, thanks for considering this. Let me know if there is anything more I can do.
Caleb

@caleb531 caleb531 changed the title Recognize source keyword (for Gemfiles) Recognize source keyword in grammar (for Gemfiles) Jun 23, 2016
@50Wliu
Copy link
Contributor

50Wliu commented Jun 24, 2016

Would source fit better with the keywords on line 147 instead? I'm not familiar with Ruby at all, but to me it doesn't look like it fits in where it is right now.

@caleb531
Copy link
Contributor Author

caleb531 commented Jun 24, 2016

My thinking was that source should be grouped with gem, because both seem to only appear in Gemfiles and both are declarative statements (whereas most keywords on line 147 seem to be generic Ruby access modifiers and access-related functions).

@50Wliu
Copy link
Contributor

50Wliu commented Jun 24, 2016

Ok, I'll follow your advice :).

@50Wliu 50Wliu merged commit d2d6be3 into atom:master Jun 24, 2016
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants