Highlight .env / .envrc files

[yoav-lavi]

Both are currently treated as plain text.

For .env it would probably be best to include \.env(\.(\w)+)?, .envrc could do the same or just .envrc.example as a single addition to .envrc

[yoav-lavi]

(I think .env shares the same syntax as .ini and .envrc the same as .sh but TBD)

[dob9601]

I did some searching around and it seems vim, amongst other editors, treat .envs as a shell file too: https://github.com/vim/vim/blob/e5f7cd0a60d0eeab84f7aeb35c13d3af7e50072e/runtime/filetype.vim#L1974

I've been looking for an issue to get me started contributing to helix and will happily pick it up later today if it hasn't been done

[dob9601]

Hmm, env highlighting already seems to exist for .env and .envrc via the bash grammar:

helix/languages.toml

Lines 2262 to 2270 in 13d4463

	[[language]]
	name = "env"
	scope = "source.env"
	file-types = [".env", ".env.local", ".env.development", ".env.production", ".env.dist", ".envrc"]
	injection-regex = "env"
	comment-token = "#"
	indent = { tab-width = 4, unit = "\t" }
	roots = []
	grammar = "bash"

I've opened up an editor and can also confirm that the highlighting is being applied.

@yoav-lavi is there any chance your local languages.toml is overriding the configuration of the default one?

Might be that the file-types to be relaxed a bit if your env file has a .local extension or similar

[yoav-lavi]

You're likely right, I must have looked at a .env(rc)?.example file, as I have .env(rc)? files ignored. I don't think the current mechanism supports wildcards though, maybe we could add the common variants manually

[dob9601]

I could see wildcard filename support being useful anytime you've got a file with a local override. It might be better to do the extra work to add wildcard support but open to opinions on that one

[pascalkuthe]

closed by #4536