From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: andres.ramirez Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: tree-sitter and emacs-devel Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:07:45 +0000 Message-ID: <86eet56cke.fsf@gmail.com> References: <83ftdlyhx0.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="127423"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Cancel-Lock: sha1:igBW1wIPphYo65baEzXA+DlWAIU= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 02 19:08:45 2020 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 1jK3Ke-000X3S-Br for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 19:08:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44908 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jK3Kd-000276-Dk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 13:08:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43090) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jK3Jp-0001CO-DP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 13:07:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jK3Jo-0005zr-BZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 13:07:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qk1-f194.google.com ([209.85.222.194]:45116) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jK3Jo-0005zS-7d; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 13:07:52 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qk1-f194.google.com with SMTP id o18so1949175qko.12; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 10:07:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :cancel-lock:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=P71rRc4GTQ6Y27/S7xYcWel8u/VidDZsV3a+7eC/Uvk=; b=E37/w760TBzK3ikVH7mkk8bwpibXGz+//x5dKKd4814hs4rYT76Y9zcJt4RGxAjCKO zrED5uXDZh5YPFpQBp4srA+DFKbBdr5yBBTgWwz2EPB9cBAWvJwDxkaSQNeMJQcfEh1A XTKJjSXodauB6wp9RiVMQ9lnWc2pi9pxup+jNY8afF5oSfXVY6Abaqu9efmo+ShGfU+q /WHw2WBL6DhvjJyjvwxMReZf5aSsJKycR+KkVqsK7Z3j8Ey9zdEhmxma0truHwrCxGCn Br3bZtC1nUyIX4Uw66VPqFbKYk5IrJG+qKUlhv2WOxAGbf7ocyi4jBoA6lp3GtOFAJic bpuQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYP5k9BLXJWl0uPu3LFZlbbTI5L6USHsHi8mvqADfK6VVmUXyJR z/YDDRYlQDb0xuHJw33yh2tPUNP2tJU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypInAOahdizLbeVxe5CJzL5HEjDdjUN5h/tHvIhwAkQfmo+wBH/2Q7hzg2oS1nSXEKZJZ5sPrQ== X-Received: by 2002:a37:6514:: with SMTP id z20mr4585138qkb.197.1585847271196; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 10:07:51 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from sacsa.n800.arm.processor.yandex.fm ([190.236.255.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f68sm3987276qtb.19.2020.04.02.10.07.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 02 Apr 2020 10:07:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83ftdlyhx0.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.222.194 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:246277 Archived-At: >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Stefan Monnier Date: Thu, 02 Apr >> 2020 12:01:38 -0400 >> >> FWIW, re-reading over the discussions around emacs-tree-sitter of >> the last few days, I must say I'm not proud: if I were a >> contributor to tree-sitter and/or emacs-tree-sitter, all this >> squabbling over how tree-sitter "should" work (from people who have >> not been involved in either of those and don't have any practical >> experience of how it performs or why it's designed that way) would >> make me run away screaming and promising myself never to come back >> to that mad house. Eli> I actually think that this discussion brought up several Eli> important issues and topics (and I don't mean my own messages) Eli> that should be considered if such technology is to become part of Eli> Emacs (and I very much hope it will). Yes, there's quite a bit Eli> of noise, as in any discussion, but that's inevitable. The Eli> alternative is to invent your own wheel each time, and make all Eli> the same mistakes. Eli> I remember a similar situation on the emacs-bidi mailing list 15 Eli> years ago when the bidirectional editing support for Emacs was Eli> just a pipe dream. Many of the ideas expressed there I tossed, Eli> but some are now part of our implementation, and I'm glad I had Eli> the opportunity to hear them. I'm also glad that Gerd Moellmann Eli> was there to provide his perspective on what would and what Eli> wouldn't be viable, I would have never arrived at the current Eli> design without his guidance, not without making several grave Eli> mistakes anyway. +1 This discussion have bring me food for thought.