Is there a config to have # KEYWORD(username):?

[galenseilis]

I am excited about #332! It should go well with Ruff's TD002.

In the mean time, is there currently a way to support this in config?

I made an attempt, but in retrospect I see that trying to update the REGEX is insufficient. I expect I am missing things specifying the allowed patterns and what colour they should get...

-- init.lua
{
    'folke/todo-comments.nvim',
    event = 'VimEnter',
    dependencies = { 'nvim-lua/plenary.nvim' },
    opts = {
      signs = false,
      search = {
        command = 'rg',
        args = {
          '--color=never',
          '--no-heading',
          '--with-filename',
          '--line-number',
          '--column',
        },
        pattern = [[\b(KEYWORDS)(\(\w+\))?:]], -- updated pattern to match KEYWORDS and KEYWORDS(name)
      },
    },
  }

[inkfin]

Hi, I came across this problem and unfortunately it seems that Vim regex has some issues that prevent the ? quantifier from working properly.

I've tried @galenseilis answer, but it failed to match TODO with parentheses. I also tried a few other approaches but wasn’t lucky either, so I ended up doing this instead:

highlight = {
    pattern = {
        [[.*<(KEYWORDS)\s*:]],              -- TODO: this matches
        [[.*<(KEYWORDS)\s*\(\w*\)\s*:]],    -- TODO(author): this also matches
    },
},
search = { pattern = [[\b(TODO)\s*(\(\w*\))?\s*:]] },

Fortunately, the rg regex works fine — hope this helps anyone running into the same issue!

[mattness]

I also ran into this problem, and tried the patterns from both @galenseilis and @inkfin. Inkfin's pattern list got me close, but didn't highlight the entire (user) part of the comment:

I ended up settling on this pattern that both correctly highlights and correctly populates the quickfix list:

highlight = {
  pattern = [[.*<((KEYWORDS)(\(\w+\))?)\s*:]],
},
search = {
  pattern = [[\b(KEYWORDS)(?:\(\w+\))?\s*:]],
},

The key difference here is wrapping an additional capture group around both the (KEYWORDS) group and the (\(\w+\))? group for the (user) part. This is necessary because the highlighter expects the keyword (TODO, NOTE, etc) to be in the second capture or the third capture if a third is present and without the wrapper the third capture group ends up containing (user) which isn't a keyword. The wrapping capture group forces the (KEYWORDS) group to always be the third group, even when(user) is absent, making the pattern work for both cases.

See here:

todo-comments.nvim/lua/todo-comments/highlight.lua

Lines 50 to 56 in 19d461d

	local m = vim.fn.matchlist(str, [[\v\C]] .. pattern)
	if #m > 1 and m[2] then
	local match = m[2]
	local kw = m[3] ~= "" and m[3] or m[2]
	local start = str:find(match, 1, true)
	return start, start + #match, kw
	end

So, for the capturing part of the pattern - ((KEYWORDS)(\(\w+\))?) - the m table contains the following:

• m[2] = The contents of the outer capture group: (KEYWORDS)(\(\w+\))?
• m[3] = The contents of the first inner capture group: KEYWORDS
• m[4] (unused) = The contents of the second inner capture group: \(\w+\)

The following table illustrates the outcome:

Input	m[2] / match	m[3]	m[4]	Resulting kw
-- TODO: msg	TODO	TODO	""	✅ TODO
-- TODO(user): msg	TODO(user)	TODO	(user)	✅ TODO

[mazunki]

Thanks! I changed \w with my username to only highlight my own TODOs:

opts = {
  highlight = {
    pattern = [[.*<((KEYWORDS)(\(mazunki\))?)\s*:]],
  },
  search = {
    pattern = [[\b(KEYWORDS)(?:\(\w+\))?\s*:]],
  },
}