bug#61235: 30.0.50; tree-sit: `treesit-node-check' lacks a way to tell if a node belongs to a deleted parser

[Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com>]

Mickey Petersen <mickey@masteringemacs.org> writes:

> Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> On Feb 7, 2023, at 12:03 AM, Mickey Petersen <mickey@masteringemacs.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> On Feb 6, 2023, at 7:21 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Mickey Petersen <mickey@masteringemacs.org>
>>>>>> Cc: casouri@gmail.com, 61235@debbugs.gnu.org
>>>>>> Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2023 14:08:46 +0000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All I want is a way for treesit-node-check to tell me if the node
>>>>>> belongs to a dead or alive parser.
>>>>>
>>>>> That'd be fine by me, but the patch posted by Yuan was a different
>>>>> one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yuan, any reason not to extend treesit-node-check instead?
>>>>
>>>> I did extend treesit-node-check in the patch. But I also added a
>>>> function treesit-parser-live-p, which makes the same check but
>>>> directly on a parser. It just made sense to me that if we let
>>>> treesit-node-check check the nodes’ parser’s status, we’d also add a
>>>> function to allow directly checking the status of a parser.
>>>>
>>>> Micky, the function I added (and the extension to treesit-node-check)
>>>> checks that the parser is not deleted AND its buffer is live. That
>>>> makes the most sense to me, but would it cause any problem for your
>>>> use case?
>>>
>>> Thanks for turning around the features so fast.
>>>
>>> I can use `treesit-node-buffer' and `buffer-live-p' to accomplish
>>> that, so perhaps leaving out that check makes sense?
>>
>> I’m hoping to write the function as I described, ie, return t only if
>> the parser is not deleted and its buffer is live. So I wonder if this
>> definition of “live” would work for you?
>
> Sounds good to me, and I think others will find it useful as well!

Done.

Yuan