Re: [DISCUSSION] Refactoring fontification system

[Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>]

Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com> writes:

> Dear all,
>
> Recently, there have been multiple issues related to incorrect
> fontification:
> - https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/23707.20428.546749.44853@frac.u-strasbg.fr/
> - https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/87fsujp7mc.fsf@web.de/
> - https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/87czvqxdn9.fsf@gmail.com/
> - https://list.orgmode.org/8735nsv9qo.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr/T/#me1c44b6e493dd280cca4f042b833c24749ae4fe0
>
> These issues keep appearing because our current fontification code is
> based on regexps and only approximates the actual Org grammar elements.
> It is largely a legacy from the times when org-element parser was not a
> thing.
>
> Maybe it is a time to upgrade the fontification according to our
> state-of-art parser?
>
> Instead of fontifying elements individually via regexps, we can leverage
> org-element-map, org-element-parse-buffer, org-element-cache, and
> jit-lock-mode. Each type of Org element/object can be assigned with a
> fontification function accepting a single argument - the element datum.
>
> Also, the fontification code can be move to a separate library.
>
> WDYT?
>

Sounds like a better approach to me. In addition to being
more accurate, this would mean we don't need to keep 2 separate
definitions in sync or have confusing font locking where the regexp and element
definitions are different. Should gives us increased consistency and
less maintenance.