From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2022 11:16:53 +0300 Message-ID: <83a65fhwne.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87h6zp75nt.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <87h6zp75nt.fsf@yahoo.com> <87h6zptloj.fsf@gmail.com> <87y1t06apv.fsf@yahoo.com> <87k04ksa4f.fsf@gmail.com> <87k04k5stm.fsf@yahoo.com> <875yg34aas.fsf@yahoo.com> <0E4C5439-B28D-420A-9E4A-BA059269AD57@gmail.com> <87wn8j2nfs.fsf@yahoo.com> <83pmebi05g.fsf@gnu.org> <87sfj72ism.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37470"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: casouri@gmail.com, rpluim@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 29 10:17:35 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ooh26-0009bY-Nd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 29 Oct 2022 10:17:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ooh1Y-0001hI-07; Sat, 29 Oct 2022 04:17:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ooh1W-0001gk-7t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Oct 2022 04:16:58 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ooh1V-0001gd-EY; Sat, 29 Oct 2022 04:16:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=YFtQc3q8kB+/f5HZRQ6Nv1nQljQ/3lMENoGcC09IPfg=; b=P7mFKcfUrC6m Iy/V4czsy0JP+P7KrOV2H9jbsu1DE8L6+N1MLO1Ig5SaNBywt8gkm0ZuEtW2FUUL8r/dpbVl+nujs 1hH5bOW/JMXZKFdLeN4nCIpr+i8L2I6i8SHkq9kNFgLys/96iF+2pXpTB8AIA2Z9ixjo4TwIKzFjB unUqLxa+zuoQEnc4TO1ESFx6T+0usQmOQjOSXenJ5jJMH9GCW3yHS22UezXQQqAie7JJ9pGy2cm0J uSRxHtX4edABL8jYwf4/9zh/6crRGlaM871h9pVCpXSaG5sfYZKVfxIR73jBS5gLo5ovAEJZSu0FZ QewpPfLCUaZEcvfuqqbo0g==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ooh1U-0003Of-MO; Sat, 29 Oct 2022 04:16:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87sfj72ism.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Sat, 29 Oct 2022 15:25:13 +0800) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:298740 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: casouri@gmail.com, rpluim@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2022 15:25:13 +0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > That is correct, but your change removed only "we", and left "I" > > intact. In any case, rephrasing to avoid pronouns doesn't necessarily > > force us to use passive voice. > > Well, if you can, please suggest some better ways to do that. Compliance! > - - It doesn't expose a syntax tree. We put the syntax tree in the > - parser object, and updating the tree is handled on the C level. > + - It doesn't expose a syntax tree. The syntax tree is placed in > + the parser object, and updating the tree is handled at the C > + level. Here I'd suggest It doesn't expose a syntax tree. The syntax tree is part of the parser object, and updating the tree is handled on the C level. > - - We don't expose tree cursor either. I think Lisp is slow enough > - to nullify any performance advantage of using a cursor, though I > - don't have evidence. Also I want to minimize the number of new > - types we introduce. Currently we only add parser and node type. > + - The tree cursor is not exposed either. I think Lisp is slow > + enough to nullify any performance advantage of using a cursor, > + though I don't have evidence. Also I want to minimize the number > + of new types we introduce. Currently we only add parser and node > + type. Here I'd suggest It doesn't expose the tree cursor, either. Presumably, Lisp is slow enough to make insignificant any performance advantages from using the cursor. Not exposing the cursor also minimizes the number of new types this adds to Emacs Lisp; currently, this adds only the parser and node types.