Re: [PATCH] userdiff: add builtin driver for kotlin language

[jaydeepjd.8914@gmail.com]

> This test does not demonstrates that numbers do not end at an '_',
> because if it did end there, the change would be from the single token
> 100000 to two tokens 100 and _000, and the mark-up would look exactly
> the same as we see here, and would remain undiagnosed.

Yes but numbers ending in `_` would be illegal syntax in Kotlin so the regex
assumes that user is writing correct code.

> Instead, write the pre-image as 100_000 and the post image as 200_000.
> Then the correct mark-up would be
> 
> <RED>100_000<RESET><GREEN>200_000<RESET>
> 
> and a bogus markup (that the test wants to diagnose) would look like
> 
> <RED>100<RESET><GREEN>200<RESET>_000

Right. I will add that test too.


> What is this "0x0F"? Did you mean just "0x"? 

`0x0F` indicates that its a hexadecimal literal in Kotlin.

> And what about prefixes 0X
> and 0B? Are they not used as prefixes for hex and binary numbers?
> Moreover, I do not see how a hex number 0xff would be matched as a
> single token.
> 
> > +	 /*match unary and binary operators*/
> > +	 "|[-+*/<>%&^|=!]*"),

Yes. I would make the changes.

> Do not do this. There is an implicit single-character match that need
> not be written down in the regex. List all multi-character operators
> (but not the single-character operators) like you did in earlier rounds.
> As written, the "++!=" in an expression such as "a++!=b++" (which is not
> unlikely to be seen in real code) would be regarded as a single token.
> 
> The verb "match" in the comment does not match the style of the other
> comments (drop the word), and please insert blanks between the comment
> delimiters and the text.
> 
> >   PATTERNS("markdown",
> >   	 "^ {0,3}#{1,6}[ \t].*",
> >   	 /* -- */

Noted.


Thanks,
Jaydeep.