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: Suggesting that feature/tree-sitter be merged (was Re: Tree-sitter and major mode inheritance) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 20:51:13 +0200 Message-ID: <83tu2u7p7i.fsf@gnu.org> References: <0249C656-21C8-49F2-B979-A1894BF80637@gmail.com> <6DDC3B43-8B34-41A8-9BCA-77EEAD0EB124@gmail.com> <95C0B9E2-9C5B-4206-87D8-FA388DA3A1C8@thornhill.no> <83v8na7pww.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkp2u6j4.fsf@thornhill.no> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39369"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: casouri@gmail.com, jostein@kjonigsen.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Theodor Thornhill Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 19 19:51:56 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 1owSwW-000A3R-5H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 19:51:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1owSvy-0003nc-Gr; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 13:51:22 -0500 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 1owSvq-0003nM-Ny for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 13:51:15 -0500 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 1owSvo-0002vG-LX; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 13:51:14 -0500 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=+3xFd0hkHf6mZ2+hkUpws/ODfW6KZ4pITVrWfhfJyKs=; b=Sr1SCPrw/c0J XYOhNZFC3FIJzZNU7H7bNjPwZNUe/dAlqiqvUYpDnt5vKX6CoYLIRG/5f0wFfGvvUwyTyKk8t8iQS O7TsQsXiHSkMeO0kkXWL18p+BxSP/DPx3pFlZ1WsisH1riEj50BPodr4XaWEIiUdjC3wVnlsgmmZU dGdLnFqh0W7cyqJUdaLvjBHlPwxQTZyTIWL+ek+Z+GNPF1p/YcVaZE8Nv5QO6iKsd1ze2RZUAscM5 ijfp8m0XLjbg9OUhzT/WHRTikibvnoAlIQaLlhWNF66K47biheVlQl8YF/5BRosMfNNfh5kqa2lf8 AHZBfnbLEUPnbEqA9BkxGA==; 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 1owSvj-0008C1-RT; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 13:51:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87bkp2u6j4.fsf@thornhill.no> (message from Theodor Thornhill on Sat, 19 Nov 2022 19:46:07 +0100) 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: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:300196 Archived-At: > From: Theodor Thornhill > Cc: casouri@gmail.com, jostein@kjonigsen.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 19:46:07 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > Btw, should we add C# to c-ts-mode.el? Or did we already discuss that and > > decided against? I don't remember, sorry. > > I don't think we decided against, and we didn't really discuss it. IIRC > your "challenge" was for the cc modes already included in emacs, and C# > is not that. But seeing how there's a functioning cc-based c#-mode, I > could tweak that to include both. The Cc mode variant is very stable > and have been for some time already. There's no need to maintain the > one in ELPA, and as I'm the author of it I think we can merge both? So > we can have in-tree support for c# whether or not you have tree-sitter > enabled? I can whip up a patch for that if you want, or we could just > add the tree-sitter variant. In any case, I think c#-mode should > probably not be inside of c-ts-mode, considering that it's not a > superset of C, like C++, but its own entity. > > What do you think? It's fine with me to have C# support both with and without tree-sitter, if it's indeed easy. Thanks.