vscode: improved Svelte-Pug syntax highlighting #645
Merged
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Practically fixes #295, and helps with #106
About
Adds improved syntax highlighting when using Pug with Svelte. It assumes the user is using
svelte-preprocessor, as the highlighting matches against the mixins that come with that plugin. As far as I can tell, all of the usual features of Svelte appear mostly natural in Pug now, albeit surrounded in quotation marks for anything embedded.Please note: this is only a bunch of Textmate bundles. This does not add any additional functionality beyond highlighting and embedding, unfortunately. If less clunky Pug support was to be added, I suspect it would require a modified Pug compiler, or at least a lot of preprocessing with regex.
Neat Features:
source.sveltescope{...}blocks in certain contexts=instead of!={...}interpolation case,{{...}}for object literals instead of statement blocks. This means that when setting opts. objects for functions the syntax highlighting will be appropriate for a JS/TS objectdiv: Component()p Some text #[+if('someVar') more text] even more textCompromises:
What's missing?
svelte:[something]elements. Doesn't break the highlighting either, though.The bad:
Some images