From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs rendering comparisson between emacs23 and emacs26.3 Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:39:55 -0400 Message-ID: References: <86tv2h2vww.fsf@gmail.com> <20200322123818.GB32470@ACM> <87eetk5swm.fsf@gnu.org> <20200326193128.GC14092@ACM> <86d08y4zsx.fsf@gmail.com> <83sghs7qdz.fsf@gnu.org> <7ee94ed4-7a11-90bd-df69-c0eeacaf191c@gmail.com> <835zeo7c92.fsf@gnu.org> <05de335b-383e-b32d-2e7e-e79192d364de@yandex.ru> <03981ead-3aca-c238-a9d0-88407ffae451@yandex.ru> <83wo745tw6.fsf@gnu.org> <837dz35j30.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="38372"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: cpitclaudel@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Dmitry Gutov To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 29 18:41:10 2020 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 1jIazk-0009rz-Qw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 18:41:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39510 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jIazi-0008GD-SP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:41:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46576) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jIaym-0007gC-AX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:40:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jIayk-0000N8-S9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:3451) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jIaye-0008SY-Lq; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:40:01 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0DA5A81254; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4C205809C8; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:39:57 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1585499997; bh=+MK2aanLjOV4oZ7qFYJ9vi4scgnWK/5pBGF1MOHbbok=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=BmKLhdC3TPZk0fiZX3gLzks8ohQKnq5o1gQMnUi6OXQE2QYOHLbOQXJHKHKbt4z3s r6ycUhxVeKXC6yvGo73xbpdJc+IAisq3O3VCVKoV5R/i2haoDZlRjZwLD62xnp+uu4 1Sb3lNTBWDq4OxzZe5ZnzMrXM1iUypeSM1ENKMEgkBGEdmNerya2VBGiCJmYYHmZ+w nCvaytw2o1LLIuitH3I/6zpf3faNKgzyW992n/e+B7aGOOta0ZaYbOnCoPGax82v2J Rjw3ZzeXsj1IqVo68E+H/EEAB+klFeXKxO64drSmYhOkaA8pLDeAaY1a2Q1q8eXmlk /jKow2QWozvPA== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B784912086C; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:39:56 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <837dz35j30.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 29 Mar 2020 17:30:59 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:245944 Archived-At: > In any case, tossing JIT font-lock and going back to using all kinds > of hooks is a non-starter. I think it's just a reflection of the fact that author doesn't know enough about jit-lock and font-lock. I sent him some patches that should help. > More generally, I'm surprised, to say the least, that such > a significant job is being done without saying even a single word > here, let alone making sure the basic design is deemed reasonable by > the core developers. Do they really think this will make the > acceptance of the code easier? I think this risks being read as unwelcoming, which is unlikely to encourage them to get in touch with emacs-devel. tree-sitter, like LSP, is something Emacs should embrace. I think in the case of tree-sitter we would benefit from participating directly in its development to make sure it's easy enough to integrate into Emacs (e.g. doesn't require a Javascript or C compiler on the end-user side). Stefan