Objective C++ isn't syntax highlighted like C++

[torarnv]

Language set to Objective-C:

Language set to C++

Ignoring the red preprocessor styling, which is my doing, why isn't the C++ qt_apple_isSandboxed styled like normal C++ in the Objective-C++ mode?

Comparing Objective-C to C as well

I'd expect the C (and C++ parts) to be exactly the same, with the "Objective"-parts added.

Thanks!

[Akzestia]

Hi @torarnv, from what I know, Zed currently doesn't support

; inherits c

which means the only highlights that are being used, are the ones from Objective-C grammar with few modifications including replacing unsupported directives like @storage_classes with @keyword here etc.

I'll look into it, but I'm not sure if it will be possible to provide exact 1 to 1 syntax highlighting for .m && .mm files, so they look like pure C or C++.

[Akzestia]

There are definitely some improvements to the current highlights queries to be done, but it still won't resolve the issue (even if I put all of the highlight queries from c && c++ alongside the current ones, which not gonna work as the Objective-C grammar doesn't support them)

[torarnv]

I see, so the grammar needs to fundamentally contain both the C/C++ parts and the Objective-C/C++ parts? Or Zed needs to somehow support mixing grammars?

[Akzestia]

I see, so the grammar needs to fundamentally contain both the C/C++ parts and the Objective-C/C++ parts? Or Zed needs to somehow support mixing grammars?

Probably both, I'm just saying that with current level of support there is no way to do the same/1 to 1 highlights without breaking the extension.

Also in case with Qt, I think it should have a separate extension(kinda), cause it has a lot of "special" stuff, for example in the code you showed previously

QT_END_NAMESPACE
QT_BEGIN_NAMESPACE

Those won't be supported by any c, c++ or objective-c grammar, same also goes for other stuff like Q_OBJECT, Q_PROPERTY etc.

[torarnv]

I see, so the grammar needs to fundamentally contain both the C/C++ parts and the Objective-C/C++ parts? Or Zed needs to somehow support mixing grammars?

Probably both, I'm just saying that with current level of support there is no way to do the same/1 to 1 highlights without breaking the extension.

Thanks for looking into it! 🙁

Also in case with Qt, I think it should have a separate extension(kinda), cause it has a lot of "special" stuff, for example in the code you showed previously

QT_END_NAMESPACE
QT_BEGIN_NAMESPACE
Those won't be supported by any c, c++ or objective-c grammar, same also goes for other stuff like Q_OBJECT, Q_PROPERTY etc.

Those things are not as special as you think 😉 They are just preprocessor defines:

• https://github.com/qt/qtbase/blob/dev/src/corelib/global/qtconfigmacros.h#L105
• https://github.com/qt/qtbase/blob/dev/src/corelib/kernel/qtmetamacros.h#L134

Which the C++ grammar should handle perfectly fine.

[Akzestia]

@torarnv I have a small update in regards to the highlights.

There is another problem besides Zed's level of support. The C++ and Objective-C grammars are treating same predicates differently.

From your example

bool qt_apple_isSandboxed() {
#if defined(Q_OS_MACOS)
    static bool isSandboxed = qt_mac_processHasEntitlement(u"com.apple.security.app-sandbox"_s);
    return isSandboxed;
#else
    return true;  // All other Apple platforms
#endif
}

QT_END_NAMESPACE
@implementation NSObject (QtExtras)
- (id)qt_valueForPrivateKey:(NSString*)key {
    if (qt_apple_isSandboxed())
        return nil;

    return [self valueForKey:key];
}
@end

_s part of the u"com.apple.security.app-sandbox"_s differs between 2

in C++ _s is treated as literal_suffix

but in Objective-C it's treated as identifier

Also user_defined_literal vs concatenated_string

So it will be impossible to recreate 1 to 1 highlights without writing a custom "up-to-date" Objective-C/C++ grammar :)

[torarnv]

Thanks for the update! Do you know how other editors/highlighters manage this?

My naive assumption was that since the "objective" parts are additions to the base language, that the grammar would be something like "find objc-specific syntax, if not, fall back to rules for c/c++" :)

I don't suppose the Objective-C/C++ grammar could be manually "inherited" from the C/C++ one by some auto-generation/scripting of combining grammars?

[Akzestia]

Thanks for the update! Do you know how other editors/highlighters manage this?

My naive assumption was that since the "objective" parts are additions to the base language, that the grammar would be something like "find objc-specific syntax, if not, fall back to rules for c/c++" :)

I don't suppose the Objective-C/C++ grammar could be manually "inherited" from the C/C++ one by some auto-generation/scripting of combining grammars?

NeoVim does support inherits & extends look here for details.