add % as a dedicated punctuation scope

[dustypomerleau]

The way this Elixir syntax is written doesn't specifically address capture groups for maps or structs. As a result, somehow % was left out of all scopes, including punctuation. I considered writing a proper struct/map regex to capture all the scopes (and I am still happy to do that), but this was the simplest solution to allow % to match other punctuation (or be themed in general). Since Elixir doesn't use % as a modulo operator, it seems safe to simply give it the one scope in all contexts. Giving it a separate scope allows theme designers to contrast it with the neighboring curly braces if they prefer.

Struct names are currently scoped as variable.other.constant.elixir. That scope was intended for references to module names, but it ends up capturing any capitalized name, including structs. That doesn't bother me, but if others prefer to theme struct names independently, I can add the full regex with captures.

[axelson]

Thanks for the write-up and the PR!

Struct names are currently scoped as variable.other.constant.elixir. That scope was intended for references to module names, but it ends up capturing any capitalized name, including structs. That doesn't bother me, but if others prefer to theme struct names independently, I can add the full regex with captures.

This seems fine to me as-is since structs are always modules.

[lukaszsamson]

This seems fine to me as-is since structs are always modules.

That's not entirely true. Structs are compile time atoms or aliases. This is valid elixir:

%:non_elixir_module{}

[dustypomerleau]

I guess the question is: Given the frequency with which an atom might be used in a struct name, are you happy for it to simply be highlighted as an atom (constant.other.symbol.elixir)? I have no idea how often this comes up.

[jayjun]

I’m not bothered by this because modules in remote function calls are scoped the same now.

Foo.bar()  # variable.other.constant.elixir
:foo.bar() # constant.other.symbol.elixir

[dustypomerleau]

Assuming you don't need a meta scope wrapping the entire struct, it's easy enough to do something like:

(%) punctuation.definition.map.elixir
(:)? punctuation.definition.constant.elixir
([A-z](\w|\.)*)? variable.other.constant.elixir
\{ uncaptured

It's just a question of whether it's unnecessary complexity, given it occurs rarely.

[axelson]

Given the frequency with which an atom might be used in a struct name, are you happy for it to simply be highlighted as an atom (constant.other.symbol.elixir)?

I think so. Since structs are an elixir-concept, there is almost no reason to define a struct as a lowercase atom. I'm going to go ahead and merge this.