Roslyn: String Interpolation highlight issue

[deepumi]

Version Used:
VS 2017, VS 2015
C# 6.0

String interpolation does not highlight argument(s) if a string contains colon character ":". Please refer the screenshot for more info.

Actual Behavior

Expected Behavior

[jnm2]

This has bothered me for ages. :') {key} should keep the underline (blue if possible) but be white.

[0xd4d]

It happens because the text editor has a URL classifier that uses a color that has a higher priority than most other colors.

A workaround if you don't like to see any highlighted links: disable "Enable single-click URL navigation" in Text Editor / C# / General.

[deepumi]

@0xd4d I am talking about the argument highlighting issue not the URL.

[0xd4d]

@deepumi it's becuase of the URL classifier that the arguments are blue. Its color has higher priority than the other colors you see above. End result: blue text.

[YotaXP]

Perhaps, but {key} should not be interpreted as being part of the URL itself when inside an interpolated string, as any attempt to navigate to it will almost certainly fail.

[Pilchie]

I have internal bug 172884 tracking this as well, and @dpugh suggested:

• Import your own tagger provider instances and find a IUrlTagger with metadata that matches the original tagger (content type == text, tag type == IUrlTag, name == “UrlTagger”). Use this provider to create an instance of the original tagger when you create your specialized tagger.
• In your tagger implementation, pass any GetTags() call on to the original tagger.
• Examine the returned tags and exclude any that contain a $.

[miloush]

Or provide C#/VB aware URL tagger and deprecate the language-agnostic one? Perhaps Roslyn could opt out of it completely rather than going through the results and removing them afterwards, that sounds a bit like waste of user's time to me.

[deepumi]

Can't Roslyn ignore colon character ":"?

[miloush]

@deepumi Roslyn is not doing it currently at all, it's a global Visual Studio feature.

[deepumi]

@miloush Oh! got it. Thank you.

[sharwell]

Duplicate of #5863