After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 629725 - Wrong behavior if I enabled "Highlight matching brackets"
Wrong behavior if I enabled "Highlight matching brackets"
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 300458
Product: gtksourceview
Classification: Platform
Component: Syntax files
2.11.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: GTK Sourceview maintainers
GTK Sourceview maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2010-09-15 00:16 UTC by Mohammad Alhobayyeb
Modified: 2013-03-30 17:46 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.29/2.30

Attachments
Anjuta's GtkSourceView Editor Bug (76.52 KB, image/png)
2010-09-15 00:16 UTC, Mohammad Alhobayyeb 		Details

Description Mohammad Alhobayyeb 2010-09-15 00:16:44 UTC 
Created attachment 170308 [details]
Anjuta's GtkSourceView Editor Bug

If I enabled "Highlight matching brackets" in GtkSourceView editor everything is good except that it do some wrong highlighting for '>' symbol:

Look at this example:

[code]
.....
		std::cerr << ex.what() << std::endl;
.....
	builder->get_widget("main_window", main_win);
[/code]

If the courser before "get_widget" the '<' before "std::endl;" highlighted!! What is the relation here? It is a bug!

See the attached image file for a clearer example.
Comment 1 Johannes Schmid 2010-09-15 17:26:42 UTC 
Well, I guess someone found it convinient to highlight <> brackets. Anyway, it's a bug in gtksourceview.

Thanks for reporting!
Comment 2 Mohammad Alhobayyeb 2010-09-15 18:53:11 UTC 
Yes it is convinient to highlight <> brackets. But this should highlight "<>" brackets if they has a relationship. If you checked the image you will find that the highlighted brackets does not have any relationship.
Comment 3 Sébastien Wilmet 2013-03-30 17:46:40 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 300458 ***