Editor Bug

[takeshimiya]

First, there is a good reason why the %VAR% syntax exists. It is the Windows/DOS syntax for environment variables, and as such it is what many Windows devs are probably using (as it is the natural thing to do for them).

So with that in mind, you can't have abbreviations for batch files right now...

Second, this syntax existed well before the macros manager was redesigned and well before anything else, for that matter (revision 521).

And I really doubt anyone is using it nowadays.

Look, the problem is that different syntax for declaring variables is a half-attempt.
There are two ways that can solve most/all problems:

1) The fixed approach
Have only the $(VAR) syntax for new projects. All previous versions will be either supported, or translated to the $(VAR) syntax.
Code::Blocks projects are serializable.

2) The flexible approach
Let the user define multiple syntax for variables, with tokens or regexs.
Defaulting to:
$(VAR)
${VAR}
$VAR
%VAR%

I personally prefer the 1) approach, but I don't mind as both solves the aforementioned problems.

[mandrav]

So, no changes as this would possibly break existing projects.

@Takeshi: the reason all these different forms are supported is to let the user choose what he 's more accustomed to. Windows devs probably are used to %VAR% while non-windows devs are used to one of the other three forms.
And I never heard anyone complain about this fact .

[takeshimiya]

And I never heard anyone complain about this fact .

Because it's a minor issue :wink:

[mandrav]

And I never heard anyone complain about this fact .

Because it's a minor issue :wink:

What is an issue? The fact that we support all forms of variables for all platforms?  :?:

[takeshimiya]

What is an issue? The fact that we support all forms of variables for all platforms?  :?:

Well, you know that is common that developers sees something as a feature while others sees it as a bug.
Perhaps this is because in some case scenarios it behaves as a feature while in others it behaves as an issue.

In short, in this case, it's "more than one syntax to do the same" vs. "consistency" and here can be clearly seen that some prefer "consistency" (refer to the "I vote..." posts).

But, anyways, this is a minor "feature/issue" so let's move on to things with more priority. :arrow: