Re: Mode names for C-like tree-sitter modes

[Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no>]

On 14 November 2022 10:09:58 CET, Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 13, 2022, at 10:34 PM, Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 14 November 2022 02:16:13 CET, Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks to Theo’s great work, we now have tree-sitter powered major modes for C, C++, Java, JSON, CSS. Right now they are named c-ts-mode, c++-ts-mode, java-ts-mode, etc. And c-ts-mode and c++-ts-mode inherits from a dummy mode c-ts-mode--base-mode.
>>> 
>>> I think it’s fair to make C, C++ and Java modes independent, since all the cc-mode options are invalidated when we use tree-sitter. However, their name could be improved, IMO. But I can’t think of anything better than c-ts-mode :-)
>>> 
>>> (neo-c-mode… just saying)
>>> 
>> 
>> I agree and can't think of a better name either...
>
>c-nouveau-mode ;-)
>

Hah! Why not just yuan-*-mode :)

>> 
>>> c-ts-mode--base-mode should probably be a public mode, since the intention (IIUC) is enable users to configure C and C++ together, by adding hooks to this base-mode. So something like c-base-mode or c-ts-base-mode?
>>> 
>> 
>> Sure!
>> 
>>> CSS and JSON could be merged with current modes, I think. Css-ts-mode could merge with css-mode, and json-ts-mode could be merged with js-json-mode. Or we can just have a dedicated json-mode.
>>> 
>>> Theo, WDYT?
>>> 
>> 
>> That's fine with me. In any case I think we should remove tree-sitter support from js-json-mode (or merge them). I think there exist a json-mode  in both elpa and melpa, adding another isn't the best idea I think. 
>> 
>> Not sure what is best, really.
>
>Js-json-mode inherits from js-mode, which complicates the matter if tree-sitter is enabled for js-mode… Probably should remove tree-sitter from js-json-mode. Also if we decided cc-mode and tree-sitter should be mutually exclusive (which we kind of have), we should remove some cc-mode init in js-mode that runs even when tree-sitter is enabled.
>

Strong agree there :)

>The json-mode you mentioned is on ELPA, and is fairly small, we might be able to merge json-ts-mode with it. Simen, WDYT?
>
>> 
>> My vote goes to merging css and keeping others separate, but I don't have the strongest opinion there. 
>> 
>> I can prepare such a patch after we decide on something.
>
>I can also do it, that’ll save us some patching and merging ;-)
>
>Yuan

If that causes you less work just go ahead :)

Theo