This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
Enter a comment line like so: # foo #<Foo> The 'Foo' is hightlighted as if it weren't a comment.
This is supposed to be a feature. NetBeans is not only lexing the Ruby language for you, it recursively also lexes comments and strings such that in Strings for example, escape sequences use bold fonts to set them apart from normal strings. See http://wiki.netbeans.org/wiki/attach/RubyEditing/rdoc-comments.png for an example - or open-type say the "TSort" class from the Ruby library and scroll through it to look at the various ways comments are marked up. In comments, the following are tokenized into a separate category: - rdoc directives (:nodoc: etc.) - Words surrounded by special rdoc chars: *bold*, _italic_, +monospace+. These are shown using bold, italic and monospace fonts respectively - Links (http://, ftp:, as well as local method references - prefixed by "#") - these are shown as underlined/blue hyperlinks - HTML tags, such as <em>, <b>, etc. What you're running into here is the last thing; "<Foo>" is treated as a potential HTML tag. Perhaps I should restrict the matches to known HTML 4 tags rather than anything embedded in <>'s ?
I'll occasionally use <thing> is a kind of quote mechanism, so I was a little surprised to see it in a different color. It sounds useful, but it's a bit surprising that HTML would be highlighted differently in comments than the comment itself. Probably just needs some getting used to. But this seems to be an unintended side effect: # Blah blah blah something about an object: #<Object:0x4661c10> since that's the standard text representation of an object, not HTML. (And if it should be highlighted, the # should have the same highlighting as the rest of the #<Whatever:0x00000000>)
Still reproducible, but this seems rather minor, so I'm downgrading to P4.