Re: tree-sitter and emacs-devel

[Jorge Javier Araya Navarro <jorge@esavara.cr>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2354 bytes --]

It can and has for some, but at some point if the people discussing focus
too much around what is and is not an early optimization a wrong message
can be communicated, as it was pointed out in another thread that
maintainers won't help unless volunteers from third-party projects follow
to a T their demands.

P.S.: didn't notice this thread was titled paraphrasing the one I started
(tree-sitter and Emacs), I find funny I didn't notice until now.

El jue., 2 de abr. de 2020 a la(s) 11:08, andres.ramirez (
rrandresf@gmail.com) escribió:

> >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> >> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> 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.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3214 bytes --]