david.rios: david.rios: I understand that ST3 is the future of Sublime Text, but it is not the future of everything. There are other things that use the tmLanguage format, notably TextMate where the format comes from, and now GitHub also uses it for its syntax highlighter. Are you saying then that Sublime is explicitly breaking compatibility with TextMate?

I get that. I am not going to pretend to know the mind of Jon and what he will or will not support. If I were just supporting Sublime, I would migrate to the new format. The whole point to writing a new syntax engine was to improve things, I don’t know if he did it because he wants to replace the old system, or support two systems.

If you want a package that supports all editors that mimic the TextMate engine, you may have a unique problem if Jon is moving away from TextMate support. If he means to support both, then I would I would be very specific to what TextMate compatibility features are now broken; right now you have left it kind of vague and opted to just suggest directly using the old support instead of clearly defining what is broken; Jon may not even be aware of what is broken. He may not have even provided a way to specifically utilize just the old method. The sublime-syntax method was meant to be a separate language syntax from the tmLangauge support. And the rewriting of the parts of the old engine were meant to boost speed as well, but not necessarily break tmLanguage support (from what I understand).

So if you can be specific to what is broken, you may get it fixed in one of the next releases. I am not sure what this is referring to and I am not sure Jon knows either:

and since this highlighter rely on some obscure features of the old engine

What obscure features are not working? Sublime TextMate support has never been 100%, but close enough,so I don’t know if Jon ever used these obscure features.