From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Tree-sitter introduction documentation Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2022 13:10:31 +0000 Message-ID: <87a6359gvs.fsf@posteo.net> References: <868rj6vfep.fsf@gmail.com> <4895891b-e5ea-9c37-f51b-df2e479ee758@yandex.ru> <83y1qt11xq.fsf@gnu.org> <9eb013da-d0fc-8e17-c6e3-1e8f913aebfa@yandex.ru> <83pmc50xxc.fsf@gnu.org> <71cfe4e8-3bb8-b0a6-9be5-8c0a6d92cfab@yandex.ru> <83h6xg29z3.fsf@gnu.org> <838ris22n4.fsf@gnu.org> <8335901zz3.fsf@gnu.org> <87cz84y5le.fsf@posteo.net> <3F91FDEA-881A-49DB-BB52-5A0D81C004CE@gmail.com> <87k02aihrz.fsf@posteo.net> <6c9d91cffc5a0ed2c6b9@heytings.org> <87358xb1gf.fsf@posteo.net> <6c9d91cffc0fa7da3033@heytings.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31040"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Yuan Fu , Stefan Monnier , Eli Zaretskii , Dmitry Gutov , Tim Cross , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 30 14:10:57 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 1pBFA1-0007xi-Bx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 14:10:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pBF9c-0003Ox-Tk; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 08:10:33 -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 1pBF9a-0003Lz-Sd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 08:10:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pBF9Z-000205-Dd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 08:10:30 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBAC62401AF for ; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 14:10:26 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1672405826; bh=PScxgvz25hXke9xDOgqPrP37FN+bb1EqsvUjPT0O2f0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=B3Sm9qgRbuC+ydA+Pl93IuLAi9Z+RZrsXulu+pjii14bWimFBBjrXsJFvmANaD3Zc FZsAaQZ1TxAQXCfiX1x0YMu6aFRjSJ9pusP8i7YWOMTIm14GLKVSw2y9JBX0C+9c79 Y4apLcUxtITMR0ydsdUn5MzRANE4wDuYsay9pzfNrdaHQIOdV6XcnT6nfSuN9pj6Vd 9kswul4RQwf1i/NXANKW33DujHcq1UKF5Naoyjq5YBEEjiaJVCA7/B75SkMb84p51f FS4QOLAW0aBZhkWsCmDo0NrNgD4tnvWePEdiauol1XI2TGzoQitzZRUdQAbwLDHIPE evDz91en9RvYQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Nk5GT13j5z6tpZ; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 14:10:25 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <6c9d91cffc0fa7da3033@heytings.org> (Gregory Heytings's message of "Fri, 30 Dec 2022 12:07:36 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:302102 Archived-At: Gregory Heytings writes: >> >> I did try this out and confirmed that it does work (or at least I >> hope I did say that). I didn't have a nice script like you give >> here, but that this is possible was clear. >> > > You didn't, no, and it wasn't clear. You merely said "it might be > possible" (tree days ago) and "it seems that it is possible" > (yesterday). To which I replied that it isn't possible "without a lot > of complications". The script I sent is meant to clarify that point: > to show how and to what extent it is possible, and what the > complications (having to modify the source grammars manually) are. You are right, sorry about that. I tested it out but didn't report back on my results. What I am considering doing is contacting the tree-sitter developers and arguing in favour of "specifying" that a grammar has to be written in standardised EMCAScript, instead of node.js. The adjustment would be relatively minor on their end, but make the system more portable.