Re: Creating a paradigm for leveraging Tree Sitter's power

[Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no>]

On 24 December 2022 15:57:30 CET, Perry Smith <pedz@easesoftware.com> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 24, 2022, at 04:07, Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> wrote:
>> 
>> Yeah. One shortcoming of tree-sitter imo is that the parser author decides what the nodes are named. So I think we need to create a framework so that every mode can map over ast-names to Emacs concepts. The goal must be for the normal Emacs things to require little to no changes, but get the benefits from treesit.
>
>To me, in my brain, Tree Sitter is far more expressive and powerful than existing concepts.  “Little to no changes” to me implies fitting a much larger concept into a smaller container and sacrificing the possible expressiveness and power.
>

Yeah I agree, but for many things such as movement, there are some pretty advanced utilities already in Emacs. Would be a shame to just implement it all in an incompatible package just because we didn't try really hard to incorporate it :)

>> I think we should just start doing that immediately on the master branch and allow for "big" changes going forward. We should settle on something good for Emacs 30, hopefully.
>> 
>> I'm a little worried we feel we need "complete" proposals too soon.
>> 
>> Let's get all good ideas on the table, implemented and installed, then we can consolidate after we discover pain points etc.
>> 
>> I'm working on changing the forward/backward thing and transpose. Not only for tree-sitter, but for others as well :)
>> 
>> What do you think?
>
>Yes.  I completely agree.  I guess for others, you can take my initial post as “this is the direction I’m exploring in” but it is helpful to get feedback of new ideas and experiences from past mistakes.
>
>

Yeah I'm in no way objecting to anything you say. From experience (when it was mostly Yuan and me) these things solidify over time, and the more the merrier!

Theo