newRPL: Making RPL more readable

[Han]

(12-07-2016 03:02 PM)Claudio L. Wrote:  I think proper indent spacing is better than bold and grey background. If the end markers are visible on the screen, it is easy to identify where the block ends. If it's not on the screen, then the entire text on the screen will be bold/grey and you still don't know where it starts/ends.
If your code is way to the right, you know you are deep.

Unless the markers are unmatched. Even though the editor may properly place indentations, when a user makes an edit that adds/removes markers and their edits are on a single line (wider than the screen width -- quite possible and plausible), then it may not be so clear.

In this case, they could presumably re-run a menu command that "re-indents" everything (which could become a mess when markers are not properly matched) or they could have the editor attempt to locate a block through highlighting. In the former case, re-indentation could leave a mess of the source up until the problem is fixed and re-indentation is applied again. One could argue that the former case may also be a bit jarring since the screen would be refreshed to show presumably newly indented code. The latter case simply identifies blocks without modifying the user's source.

Another question I had regarding indentation is whether it will be similar to the HP48 which only indented key words (due to too little real estate to have too much be given to indentation). Will it be similar? Or closer to what is done on IDEs running on typical computers?

EDIT:

In the following example, seeing the markers on screen would suggest this nested list is properly formed. A highlight would show that the closing } is actually for the list of menu items and not the outer list.

Code:

{
  { menuitem1 menuitem2 menuitem3 menuitem4 @ width larger than screen and no proper closing '}'
}