How to correctly highlight array[index]?

[Curculigo]

I realized how much ecode is relying on the language server to do correct syntax highlighting now. Without the language server, code like this will not be highlighted. But there are programming languages that don't have a language server.

[SpartanJ]

In which language? What's the context? What do you want to highlight from array[index]? Do you want to highlight the [index] in a particular way?

You can always add more rules to highlight whatever is needed. Over languages where semantic-highlighting is available I usually do not try to do much work highlighting things that the semantic-highlighter will cover, but in cases where this is not an option we just need to add more rules depending on the language. This particular case it depends on what you want to do because what pattern-matching highlighting won't give you is context-aware highlighting since we don't have the AST (for example highlighting user-defined types). So it might not be possible to highlight.
Please read the following comment where I talk about my thoughts on that: #400 (comment)

Currently for most languages without semantic-highlighting I did not do an in depth pattern matching of everything, but it's possible to improve basically all definitions, I just don't focus on that because all languages that I use daily provide semantic-highlighting and the quality is really good. This is one of the things I would like collaboration, since I'm focused mostly on fixes and new features, my time is very limited so I try to work on things I do actually care.

[Curculigo]

Yes. Highlight the [index]. I want to improve the syntax highlighting of V1. It doesn't have a language server.

[SpartanJ]

Sorry but I don't follow this case, if the index is just a number you'll have the number highlighted, if the index is being acceded via a user-defined variable, you won't have enough context to highlight anything useful.

I'll leave a pattern for matching what you are asking but I'm not following:

{ { "%[([%a_][%w_]*)%]" }, { "operator", "keyword2", "keyword2" } }

Please try to dedicate some time in understanding pattern matching otherwise it isn't very useful if you implement new languages without understanding what you're actually doing, because you won't be able to solve any highlighting problem in the languages implemented, which is one of the things that can take time.

[Curculigo]

Even though I marked your comment as the answer, I have never tested to see if this pattern works or not, and I will not use it. I found that the round brackets are unbalanced. A very clear indication that this pattern is broken.

[SpartanJ]

It was a typo, but if you can detect that you can fix it ;)
(edited the comment with the corrected typo)

[Curculigo]

I have been using this pattern with my custom v1.json for a while:

      {
        "pattern": "%[([%a_][%w_]*)%]",
        "type": [
          "operator",
          "keyword2",
          "keyword2"
        ]
      },

But I found a new problem. It can only color [index] of arg[index]. It can't handle arg[index+1].

[SpartanJ]

The pattern you mentioned above is for highlighting functions (you're getting confused).

But I found a new problem. It can only color [index] of arg[index]. It can't handle arg[index+1].

As I said before: it does not make sense to highlight arg[index] or arg[index+1] as a pattern, because it's not a single pattern in the syntax tree. arg is a variable, whatever is inside in the [] is unknown, there's nothing to match.

[Curculigo]

The pattern you mentioned above is for highlighting functions (you're getting confused).

Corrected. Thank you.

[Curculigo]

But I found a new problem. It can only color [index] of arg[index]. It can't handle arg[index+1].

As I said before: it does not make sense to highlight arg[index] or arg[index+1] as a pattern, because it's not a single pattern in the syntax tree. arg is a variable, whatever is inside in the [] is unknown, there's nothing to match.

OK. I got it. I don't think I can go any further.