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: An anonymous IRC user's opinion Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 22:03:41 +0200 Message-ID: <86wmgwnyle.fsf@gnu.org> References: <867c9htwt7.fsf@gnu.org> <387887a4-ba19-485e-8805-d1aabe2058ff@gutov.dev> <86y11xsbil.fsf@gnu.org> <17465b85-430a-4e91-8b12-769b60181ada@gutov.dev> <86ses4sglw.fsf@gnu.org> <86fro4sddd.fsf@gnu.org> <6ac73c67-cb2d-48ef-8f1d-683c5335aba5@gutov.dev> <8634k4s2r2.fsf@gnu.org> <082b0388-b3a1-4523-9f9b-5ead4b110e11@gutov.dev> <86plmrtemx.fsf@gnu.org> <7aa4a684-3374-4d0f-8efc-c4df29337c5e@gutov.dev> <86cyirtahu.fsf@gnu.org> <556779b3-9308-4fd3-9050-bf9c49658cd1@gutov.dev> <864j43t8t9.fsf@gnu.org> <4cc676e8-cac5-4348-99b0-243baf74687e@gutov.dev> <8634jnt5e3.fsf@gnu.org> <4864104c-cb23-4356-ad89-2fea111db66c@gutov.dev> <86ttc2rrh8.fsf@gnu.org> <86cyipsp94.fsf@gnu.org> <9cd17f8b-f88c-49f6-9024-0b6d297e18ac@gutov.dev> <867c8xsmri.fsf@gnu.org> <566ac897-ea5e-4141-bcb3-306d43c9118a@gutov.dev> <865xohrvfa.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25837"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: johan.myreen@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 21 21:04:25 2024 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 1tEDPd-0006ap-8w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:04:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tEDP1-0001Ye-3b; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:03:47 -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 1tEDOy-0001YN-WC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:03:45 -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 1tEDOy-00010i-JW; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:03:44 -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=AEKSVxTgl/5OP/MiT+w67rSoMEzK/GcAo7m9bbW2lyw=; b=nRo61Faeug0M 0YXWlYPkkopdkqEDtf1oL/fb2n+C3DSemo8FQujWP+rv+nHKCqRUWHuaQe6ypTH8eZOxzC2eHT3qt UTHoycNjeGnl8v2Ak5s3kbHwDyBltPVg1rkgy/aW7duZ8/km6kCOvR6I6QxAoLjFRlWDaM/ooPmCm fa6tnc0KQd9RYhGwfcPUfJRBS5N8ew09mDzUGyKPz+FxehWh9JqGxheFdZycxvl6fP208EHZsxI4l Qvi/M5sXCOCtGo4AKvn7iNH2gLMOnLQ7EOW12LJCzshYYMCKvo2/tHQloW0cQfpP5P3DyNkpRO+Hh lOrkCyqj0CJ2XdMO/ibJLw==; In-Reply-To: (message from Dmitry Gutov on Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:47:29 +0200) 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:325559 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:47:29 +0200 > Cc: johan.myreen@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > > On 21/11/2024 07:46, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >>>>>> I'm fine with that idea, but it'd seem like a change in paradigm. > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, indeed. So I think it has to be an optional feature, and we > >>>>> should offer more "direct" ways for expressing such preferences. > >>>> > >>>> Such as a user option called treesit-enable-modes? > >>> > >>> Something like that, yes. Because no better idea was presented. > >> > >> Take a look at the patch, then? > > > > I did. What's the next step? > > It would be nice to understand the minimum requirements to replace the > current approach. If you think that I have all of them figured out, you are wrong. Coming up with such requirements is not easy, and should probably be a team job. I will try, when I have time, to post a list of what I think should be part of those requirements, but feel free to beat me to it. > > Then you should understand that I think it _is_ a replacement for the > > current setup, which AFAIK we all consider as sub-optimal. > > Here's a quote one of your previous emails: > > > This is okay as an opt-in feature, but it cannot be the only way for > > users to tell Emacs they prefer one or more TS-based modes. For > > starters, some people might be annoyed by these suggestions, and might > > prefer more proactive ways of enabling those modes. > > I have proposed an implementation of a "more proactive way". If it seems > insufficient to you, perhaps you could describe missing scenarios that > are supported with the the current approach. They might be easy enough > to add (or explain how they are supported already through other means). I already did: IMO we should have user commands to tell Emacs that the user wants to use these modes, not only suggestions by Emacs to use them, triggered by visiting files. > > IOW, we do want to avoid the situation where loading a mode changes > > auto-mode-alist or major-mode-remap-defaults or any other global data, > > right? > > Sure. > > > If so, why wouldn't those alternatives be the replacement for > > that? > > Sorry, I don't understand your proposed alternative. > > If you want to see just a different set of capabilities instead, could > you enumerate them? See above. And if there are others, I'd be glad to hear and consider them.