[SVN] Groovy Grails bundle.

[Luke Daley]

On 25/10/2007, at 7:13 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote:

> I think in this case it will be okay. ⌃⇧G is a key in the  
> “bundle actions” name space, and the actions seems to be  
> something you want to use in those file types if you have the  
> Groovy Grails bundle enabled (in the future we can improve this by  
> adding in a match for the project type in the scope selector).

Excellent.

> I agree the name for the language grammar is a little obscure. Is  
> GSP short for Grails Server Page?

Yes, should I rename it to 'Grails Server Page'?

> I think the menu could benefit from using menu item separators.  
> Also, there appears to be one empty submenu (GSP → Declarations).

Ok, will do.

> Some items seems to be wrongly placed. I have else/elseif/each in  
> the root menu, but if/while under GSP → Control.

Will fix that.

>
> For aesthetic reasons I would remove the <g:…> part around all the  
> snippets that inserts this tag (it should be clear form the menu  
> hierarchy what they are about). But I won’t fight hard for such  
> change, just the <g:…> adds a lot of noise to the menu.

Will do.

Michael Sheets has made the following comments,

> Shouldn't more of the template tags (g:textField, etc) be marked  
> up? (We are going to start marking up template tags with a unique  
> scope so it would help coloring.)

I didn't quite understand, so I quizzed him, and got ...

>> I should have explained this better, I've recently defined new  
>> meta.tag sections to differentiate different kinds of tags for the  
>> purposes of coloring them with themes. They are:
>>
>> meta.tag.(metadata|structural|content|object|template)
>>
>> All the groovy tags would be meta.tag.template. Was just pointing  
>> out that you let the standard grammar pick up most of the tags, so  
>> you won't get the benefit of that. A simple match for `<g:\w+>`  
>> would work.

I still don't quite understand sorry :|

I must admit that understanding the grammar system is not my strong  
point. I tried adding a 'simple match for <g:\w+>', but couldn't get  
it working. Can I get some help here please.

Thanks to Michael and Allan for your time on this.

- LD.