else|break|next|repeat|in as Name.Function instead of Name

[vladbazon]

No description provided.

[jeanas]

Since this changes the output, you have to regenerate the tests for these languages with, e.g., pytest --update-goldens tests/examplefiles/splus.

[jeanas]

I am confused. This rule is apparently broken, since include('valid_name') comes before include('keywords') in the 'statements' state. Do you really want to highlight these as functions and not as keywords? How about simply moving include('valid_name') after include('keywords')? Could you explain the reason why else, repeat etc. are different from if, for, etc.?

[Anteru]

I've been looking at the R specification and it does claim that things like "break" are indeed functions in https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-lang.html#Flow-control-elements, but, in other sections they're considered keywords:

• https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-lang.html#Looping
• https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-lang.html#Reserved-words

I'm inclined to not change them to Function because they seem quite different from actual functions like mean etc.

[vladbazon]

I'm inclined to not change them to Function because they seem quite different from actual functions like mean etc.
library(highr) ## in the R console
highr:::cmd_latex
cmd1 cmd2
COMMENT \hlcom{ }
FUNCTION \hlkwa{ }
IF \hlkwa{ }
ELSE \hlkwa{ }
WHILE \hlkwa{ }
FOR \hlkwa{ }
IN \hlkwa{ }
BREAK \hlkwa{ }
REPEAT \hlkwa{ }
NEXT \hlkwa{ }
NULL_CONST \hlkwa{ }
LEFT_ASSIGN \hlkwb{ }

The same highlighting LaTeX command
\hlkwa{ ... }
is used for FUNCTION as for ELSE, BREAK, NEXT, IN, REPEAT

But in SLexer ("r.py") actually highlight only function names (if followed by '(' evidently), not the keyword 'break', 'else' etc.
(except when they are followed by '(' - which is correct, but not usual; we write "for i in 1:5", not "for i in() 1:5")

--vladbazon

[vladbazon]

> why else, repeat etc. are different from if, for, etc.

In R 'else' is a function, but it is not called with "else()" but simply "else" (without final '(', as recognized by Keyword.Reserved) for(i in 1:10) { if(i < 3) next # or, next() - which will be then a Keyword.Reserved print(i) if(i >= 5) break # or, break() } For another example, instead of repeat({ ### here, 'repeat' will be Keyword.Reserved # commands }) is normally written: repeat{ ### here, 'repeat' will be a 'Name' token (and with my modification, a 'Name.Function' -- which is desired) # commands } In SLexer ("r.py") we modified: 'root': [ # calls: *(r'\b(else|next|break|repeat|in)\b', Name.Function),* (r'(%s)\s*(?=\()' % valid_name, Name.Function), include('statements'),### ... ], reducing Keyword.Reserved (without 'else', 'repeat' etc.) 'keywords': [ (r'(if|for|while|return|switch|function)' r'(?![\w.])', Keyword.Reserved), ], vladbazon

…

On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 2:49 PM Jean Abou-Samra ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In pygments/lexers/r.py <#2087 (comment)>: > @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ class SLexer(RegexLexer): (r'\[{1,2}|\]{1,2}|\(|\)|;|,', Punctuation), ], 'keywords': [ - (r'(if|else|for|while|repeat|in|next|break|return|switch|function)' + (r'(if|for|while|return|switch|function)' I am confused. This rule is apparently broken, since include('valid_name') comes before include('keywords') in the 'statements' state. Do you really want to highlight these as functions and not as keywords? How about simply moving include('valid_name') after include('keywords')? Could you explain the reason why else, repeat etc. are different from if, for, etc.? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2087 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACKDSLWI5LNDYQHYWAIYETU7XP63ANCNFSM5QTETOUA> . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[jeanas]

@Leonel020681 That's our CI workflow definition. Not sure what you mean by copying it in your comment?

[Anteru]

@jean-abou-samra Probably a bot/spam