Re: Call for volunteers: add tree-sitter support to major modes

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Hello, Yuan.

On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 17:01:45 -0700, Yuan Fu wrote:


> > On Oct 9, 2022, at 1:01 PM, Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> wrote:

> > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:


> >> Some of the popular major modes for which we would like to see
> >> tree-sitter support in Emacs 29 are:

> >> c-mode
> >> c++-mode
> >> emacs-lisp-mode
> >> js-mode
> >> js-json-mode
> >> ruby-mode
> >> shell-script-mode


> > I'd like to add in Java support here as well.  But since java is part
> > of cc-mode.el, maybe it'd be best if it got its own mode, say
> > java-treesitter-mode.el, so that we don't add a dependency into
> > cc-mode?  If you agree, I can create such a major-mode as well.

> I think we can use the same major mode, just skip the cc-mode
> initialization and only enable tree-sitter stuff if
> java-use-tree-sitter is true. But I want to know Alan’s thought on
> this. I included him in CC.

Thanks!  At the moment, I'm still trying to get a handle on what
tree-sitter is and can do.  The idea of including lots of tree-sitter
modes in Emacs 29 came up very suddenly over the weekend.

> > Also, how should we mandate what modes get the new tree-sitter
> > support?  It is pretty fast to add new modes, and adding support for
> > languages not already supported in core, such as say, golang, should
> > be very feasible.  But maybe that is something that should live in
> > elpa?

> If you want to add tree-sitter support for some built-in mode, go for
> it. But I would focus on the modes we already have in core. For modes
> like golang where there is a widely used mode out there (in this case
> on ELPA), we should either ask to move it into core first, or ask the
> author to maybe add tree-sitter support, or submit a patch to him/her,
> rather than creating a duplicate go-mode in core just for the sake of
> tree-sitter.

> Yuan

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).