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 10:29:11 +0200 Message-ID: <83zgcn8i08.fsf@gnu.org> References: <0249C656-21C8-49F2-B979-A1894BF80637@gmail.com> <874juvhoyi.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7265"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net, casouri@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, theo@thornhill.no, jostein@kjonigsen.net To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 19 09:30:05 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 1owJEh-0001d3-KP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 09:30:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1owJDu-0003KZ-Gg; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 03:29:16 -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 1owJDn-0003KB-Ud for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 03:29:07 -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 1owJDm-0004Y3-ME; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 03:29:06 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=dzGBsTbG+s1/M92uIdAsmD3mu4HmS5WCxsJfgrCHj5k=; b=R2fLVnzPkVOE13R3GZbf 7s1Ik1PDDBzW+Q+kax0BcWEu5tOdp5Ef7vyJzJ4j2Ltf9yhbfw7CoYSyhTwoRLSMHfyVfwiciDv0t D9z3Bfs0jMB7uZeKTdQrQS1v92fr8Csc8bS1nm6XIAcnxgl4/cLByhaFg3jbYkrW3mclCbiXjbHQL a0eP5YvdAOyyGfJ8UWMwL1CJO037YvaMMNdT+aestLwCNWXP2u0FFomE48LwjaRTRd/ppSJTDe3tM txiajGWSx0kiLlDipXoTjPpmKiAIz4RDhH767miS3cqoIB30qf4taxt6C2Z9qX+vfm1A2dATs0YHZ FbRm+l+PUKb1qw==; 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 1owJDm-0004Qh-5S; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 03:29:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: <874juvhoyi.fsf@posteo.net> (message from Philip Kaludercic on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 22:34:13 +0000) 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:300143 Archived-At: > From: Philip Kaludercic > Cc: Yuan Fu , emacs-devel , > Theodor Thornhill , Eli Zaretskii , > jostein@kjonigsen.net > Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 22:34:13 +0000 > > Jostein Kjønigsen writes: > > > Instead of waiting for "every" major-mode to be re-implemented into a > > tree-sitter derivative in the feature/tree-sitter branch before we > > merge... How about we just accept the current "core" tree-sitter > > implementation as good enough, and consider merging that to git master > > as is. > > I think this sounds like a good idea -- as someone who has mostly just > been following the discussions. The core bindings and major modes that > are based on these are separate issues, with a clear dependency linked > them. >From where I stand, it makes very little sense to release Emacs 29 with tree-sitter support that is limited to primitives and some minimal Lisp glue on top of that. Tree-sitter was added to Emacs to allow major modes provide better support for editing program source code, so having tree-sitter "support" in Emacs 29 that didn't include at least several major modes using it would be disappointing at best. It would mean we ourselves have no idea how to make major modes use the feature. Moreover, adding those few major modes on the branch exposed several deficiencies in the original design and implementation, and required changes to make the integration better; releasing Emacs 29 with those issues unresolved (and unknown) would require significant, sometimes incompatible changes in the future, which is another reason why it would be wrong. Basically, my firm belief is that adding to Emacs infrastructure without user-level applications built on that infrastructure is wrong and runs the risk of producing features that are not used or need deep surgery before they become useful. We should avoid doing that as much as possible. > As an aside: This might also be a good opportunity to clean up some of > the current major mode implementations and make them more consistent. > The issue with custom options to enable tree-sitter for every major mode > has revealed an inherent duplication of features. There are other > inconsistencies, especially regarding bindings for equivalent operations > (e.g. in interpreted language with a repl, how to load function into the > current session: Lisp, Prolog, Python all differ in minor details). Cleaning up major modes is a Good Thing that needs no opportunities. We should do that whenever we know and agree how. > The current branch has major modes, should these be deleted before > merging? Definitely not! These modes are there because we want Emacs 29 to have them, and we want users to use them and report back.