From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Yuan Fu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Renaming eglot -- or at least add an alias? Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 23:37:28 -0700 Message-ID: References: <83pmfdduix.fsf@gnu.org> <86wn9ji3ma.fsf@gmail.com> <86tu4lsnqk.fsf@gmail.com> <8335c0p2fn.fsf@gnu.org> <83leproov6.fsf@gnu.org> <83fsfzonwn.fsf@gnu.org> <5a1e604c-4500-a476-da3d-259d9057a7f0@yandex.ru> <838rlromxu.fsf@gnu.org> <83h70dk3wf.fsf@gnu.org> <83fsfxk30x.fsf@gnu.org> <83r0zdd1cy.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9037"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Richard Stallman , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 12 08:55:00 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 1oiVdr-000294-Jt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2022 08:54:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56266 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oiVdp-0008AB-Vv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2022 02:54:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46172) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oiVN1-0007BE-7v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2022 02:37:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pj1-x102e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e]:39902) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oiVMy-0003Y4-H2; Wed, 12 Oct 2022 02:37:33 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pj1-x102e.google.com with SMTP id v10-20020a17090a634a00b00205e48cf845so1125661pjs.4; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 23:37:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=KNOJ4VaFXT9/telGUcaTDffXGYlB3J2asD44F7xDIfM=; b=fc5FBsPDK1imJvXNdXWaZ+8+kqpx/xg3y7SSGbptrSG+C1Ef93+V6VkNeE5/DMlB7x 9PpGQqKABbNy9lLOlkv1rZQIkfzGnVkS5PLDL2qUnvm46Rxdn1CRxqBnaUmfyGkO06Wi Mwtt6Hz0kfqkBG0h595stLVfRtx6TKYhjFlvDS5wJ2PYErRZ3uCyzGaMgKUIWxe5fFj6 C4v1j7hivS72ZGqniB1JaHO7wmmLce9OIPKA0Mkc6HAlQVlNPh2zIzQCzWjNcqdZSy2h ozxZb2xfHclBtHbB6cgn3medZmObCbaL6a7DJlpwgjl5YDt039AViiQqFxnHaRUwaXdp riXQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=KNOJ4VaFXT9/telGUcaTDffXGYlB3J2asD44F7xDIfM=; b=QO348kWdRWHctAuTlM+DYm8MWbjZRZh1po8rvuxFAxcJbkCiHa9UjVWXxi38H8ZACx wz/MV0XNdIeNFZMlDWt1jw/EvSALt2wv0OG5NCWymwsNcEvw9WVLzAt02ne8esY4rlVO c8YvLyA0tQPXeTT2GdqUZ1yOzNDmuepZ6zTciOqDIMv3NZX3MqhEWQ8pVaSW/eAihULV p+481SvQinGV3LIVI7F4tWKYEvqXU6pVaXLxs31/wc103ehVOgssO+8+1VNBb8XQNa32 Q4n0JRxij2HfbMyidkl5MUrvpSErDA3LAj5MvvAnT9UPhBnSx3NgRzq1UgEEfDgkhZ59 LgNQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2+HPeZb3h3xELHdN7tCi3A8yA57069Hmyj9osKY2d9Fv0Gv1nr Jg48YcijDtaQXhBniNIuNu/tM9rmT7y6nA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6wF44lm7bkg+EHmqZFa7YqW52KvTPLbyVBF5cFKd9swgHUT218kOgIvil4h7hRL7ZtGdMD0g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4c52:b0:20d:489b:5607 with SMTP id np18-20020a17090b4c5200b0020d489b5607mr3395046pjb.40.1665556650103; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 23:37:30 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from smtpclient.apple (cpe-172-117-161-177.socal.res.rr.com. [172.117.161.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 63-20020a620642000000b0056109e15638sm10071886pfg.54.2022.10.11.23.37.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 23:37:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83r0zdd1cy.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e; envelope-from=casouri@gmail.com; helo=mail-pj1-x102e.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:297574 Archived-At: > On Oct 11, 2022, at 11:04 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >=20 >> From: Richard Stallman >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 17:15:28 -0400 >>=20 >>> So, at least in principle, the functionalities based on these two >>> could overlap. If that is indeed so, we'd need to decide whether we >>> support the overlapping functionalities or use each one of these >>> packages for capabilities that are disjoint, whereby each >>> functionality is supported by the package that does it best (for = some >>> value of "best"). >>=20 >> I suggest that we define the principal user interface to enable or >> disable the user-level features, not the implementation mechanisms. >>=20 >> We could have a way to enable or disable multiple user-level features >> at once, and/or ways to enable or disable specific user-level = features >> one by one. But they should not be tied to implementation = mechanisms. >>=20 >> Of course, we can offer the user additional control over which >> implementation mechanisms to use for this or that. If it is not too >> hard or worth the trouble, why not? But such fine control should be >> for those who want to be wizards. >>=20 >> People who just want some smarter editing features should not need to >> know what is implemented by Eglot, what is implemented by = Tree-sitter, >> and what is implemented in some other way. >=20 > This discussion is primarily about our design and implementation > decisions: whether some features need to have more than one "back-end" > or just one, decided by us. AFAIU, we haven't made the final > decisions yet. Whether and how users will control that comes later. > If we decide that each feature will have only one "back-end", the part > of selecting a "back-end" is automatically resolved to a non-issue. IMO in some sense, eglot and major mode sits at the same level, and = tree-sitter a level lower. Consider this: take imenu as an example. = Major mode sets imenu-create-index-function for imenu to function. A = major mode now has two options available, one function uses tree-sitter = and one don=E2=80=99t. If the user enables eglot, eglot sets = menu-create-index-function to eglot-imenu, overriding major mode=E2=80=99s= function. =46rom this perspective, tree-sitter is just a mechanism a = major mode could use, not unlike syntax-ppss, while eglot do things its = own way, replacing parts of the major mode=E2=80=99s functionality with = its own. So it=E2=80=99s not really =E2=80=9Ctwo back-ends=E2=80=9D, tree-sitter = and eglot are different in fundamental ways. Yuan