runtime(java): Improve the recognition of the "style" method declarations Commit: https://github.com/vim/vim/commit/a4c085a3e607bd01d34e1db600b6460fc35fb0a3 Author: Aliaksei Budavei <0x000c70@gmail.com> Date: Wed Apr 24 21:04:25 2024 +0200 runtime(java): Improve the recognition of the "style" method declarations - Request the new regexp engine (v7.3.970) for [:upper:] and [:lower:]. - Recognise declarations of in-line annotated methods. - Recognise declarations of _strictfp_ methods. - Establish partial order for method modifiers as shown in the MethodModifier production; namely, _public_ and friends should be written the leftmost, possibly followed by _abstract_ or _default_, or possibly followed by other modifiers. - Stop looking for parameterisable primitive types (void<?>, int<Object>, etc., are malformed). - Stop looking for arrays of _void_. - Acknowledge the prevailing convention for method names to begin with a small letter and for class/interface names to begin with a capital letter; and, therefore, desist from claiming declarations of enum constants and constructors with javaFuncDef. Rationale: + Constructor is distinct from method: * its (overloaded) name is not arbitrary; * its return type is implicit; * its _throws_ clause depends on indirect vagaries of instance (variable) initialisers; * its invocation makes other constructors of its type hierarchy invoked one by one, concluding with the primordial constructor; * its explicit invocation, via _this_ or _super_, can only appear as the first statement in a constructor (not anymore, see JEP 447); else, its _super_ call cannot appear in constructors of _record_ or _enum_; and neither invocation is allowed for the primordial constructor; * it is not a member of its class, like initialisers, and is never inherited; * it is never _abstract_ or _native_. + Constructor declarations tend to be few in number and merit visual recognition from method declarations. + Enum constants define a fixed set of type instances and more resemble class variable initialisers. Note that the code duplicated for @javaFuncParams is written keeping in mind for g:java_highlight_functions a pending 3rd variant, which would require none of the :syn-cluster added groups. closes: #14620 Signed-off-by: Aliaksei Budavei <0x000c70@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Christian Brabandt <cb@256bit.org>

" Vim syntax file
" Language:         Texinfo (documentation format)
" Maintainer:       Robert Dodier <robert.dodier@gmail.com>
" Latest Revision:  2021-12-15

if exists("b:current_syntax")
  finish
endif

let s:cpo_save = &cpo
set cpo&vim

syn match texinfoControlSequence display '\(@end [a-zA-Z@]\+\|@[a-zA-Z@]\+\)'

syn match texinfoComment         display '^\s*\(@comment\|@c\)\>.*$'

syn region texinfoCode matchgroup=texinfoControlSequence start="@code{" end="}" contains=ALL
syn region texinfoVerb matchgroup=texinfoControlSequence start="@verb{" end="}" contains=ALL

syn region texinfoArgument matchgroup=texinfoBrace start="{" end="}" contains=ALLBUT

syn region texinfoExample matchgroup=texinfoControlSequence start="^@example\s*$" end="^@end example\s*$" contains=ALL

syn region texinfoVerbatim matchgroup=texinfoControlSequence start="^@verbatim\s*$" end="^@end verbatim\s*$"

syn region texinfoMenu matchgroup=texinfoControlSequence start="^@menu\s*$" end="^@end menu\s*$"

if exists("g:texinfo_delimiters")
  syn match texinfoDelimiter display '[][{}]'
endif

hi def link texinfoDelimiter       Delimiter
hi def link texinfoComment         Comment
hi def link texinfoControlSequence Identifier
hi def link texinfoBrace           Operator
hi def link texinfoArgument        Special
hi def link texinfoExample         String
hi def link texinfoVerbatim        String
hi def link texinfoVerb            String
hi def link texinfoCode            String
hi def link texinfoMenu            String

let b:current_syntax = "texinfo"

let &cpo = s:cpo_save
unlet s:cpo_save