From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#62333: 30.0.50; Issue with tree-sitter syntax tree during certain changes Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 19:40:19 +0300 Message-ID: <83edp642h8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87fs9yur7r.fsf@gmail.com> <83jzz5c8ml.fsf@gnu.org> <83edpdc6sn.fsf@gnu.org> <1ca302bf-99dc-7f9e-8544-063064a1cb21@yandex.ru> <831qlcdisi.fsf@gnu.org> <398721ad-79b0-3f6d-97b3-4902d9bfbe39@yandex.ru> <83wn34c2qa.fsf@gnu.org> <3b3d82d1-f0f6-a768-a5db-8dc9386a5a34@yandex.ru> <83r0tcbz8g.fsf@gnu.org> <1967361679760225@umbzx4hqxrw5qxo7.sas.yp-c.yandex.net> <83mt40bxzd.fsf@gnu.org> <83jzz4bugh.fsf@gnu.org> <3d64520c-54da-a04a-ed0d-a66b4e753f8a@yandex.ru> <831qlcaysh.fsf@gnu.org> <29679184-7366-0167-9e94-def97048f663@yandex.ru> <83v8inal29.fsf@gnu.org> <9886ffa5-ead2-50d5-a325-f6704b736ada@yandex.ru> <83fs9q9vak.fsf@gnu.org> <10aa98b6-908b-c467-7c77-767906692088@yandex.ru> <83h6u585si.fsf@gnu.org> <5c683b3b-48e8-5099-8ab1-459c348d1f88@yandex.ru> <83jzyz7qmy.fsf@gnu.org> <83h6u2444x.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29111"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: wkirschbaum@gmail.com, casouri@gmail.com, 62333@debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 30 18:41:24 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1phvL2-0007S4-G3 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 18:41:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1phvKj-000492-0j; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:41:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1phvKg-00048X-Ln for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1phvKg-0005qK-Dg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1phvKf-0004ZW-UF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:41:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 16:41:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 62333 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 62333-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B62333.168019441617512 (code B ref 62333); Thu, 30 Mar 2023 16:41:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 62333) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Mar 2023 16:40:16 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59304 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1phvJw-0004YN-DK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:40:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36652) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1phvJu-0004Y6-Eg for 62333@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:40:15 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1phvJo-0005l4-Pw; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:40:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=mXqd2QSCeK58ApE4w3ldD0ci1G+7tCiPXGoISnLywh0=; b=BShwrVJCmzWn t37jKBgJWCDUuRxbioFTjV8Yi9tgXEYfuCXGc2w1MIKDHh4XQyqvshM1AektGxSjuONT7OJDH7stj dpEYnQ/b2ksGtyjpzBa1Q0P76wlwBFUXaj48k5VqkDa19Wr8zFF7aFl1WJSogm1mJeLL2BPX3yJhU wTDWeBR7GezfuCvylxjhLIHVGVNJo2cXyQvl/IiNfzYYJ+ufXpLuLZZYjS7xEAzmIJWBPuWn/Z43B l8zYiW0ZpbBiGoyDLKJbkd/HAuqXD6kJpgxHpK3w7MCTAYTsw34QHgvzbcrbsLZtNeNlacd/vqWXU b54Se8ONq310HIQaY7I93A==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1phvJo-0000ZS-98; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:40:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Gregory Heytings on Thu, 30 Mar 2023 16:28:58 +0000) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:258938 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 16:28:58 +0000 > From: Gregory Heytings > cc: wkirschbaum@gmail.com, casouri@gmail.com, 62333@debbugs.gnu.org, > dgutov@yandex.ru > > > Something like > > > > (treesit-make-parser LANGUAGE BUFFER nil START END) > > > > and > > > > (treesit-parser-set-included-ranges RANGES...) > > > > (the latter already exists). > > > > Where "RANGES..." are included in [START..END], right? Probably. Or maybe instead of START and END we should have RANGES... > > User-defined narrowing will never contradict parser restrictions. > > You mean, they will be independent, right? In other words, if the user > sets the narrowing to 1000-1200 in a buffer in which treesit-make-parser > has been called, say, once with 'php 400 1100' and once with 'js 1100 > 1500', the two parsers will continue to have access to these ranges? The parsers _can_ have access to those ranges, if they need it for some reason. In general, everything in Emacs should honor the current restriction, unless there's a good reason to ignore it. The problem with ignoring it is that we can never know which code/user defined the restriction and for what purpose. I hope that keeping the parser's restrictions as part of the parser itself will allow us to break free of that issue when we have to widen. > >> Also, would such a parser always/never/sometimes obey the user > >> narrowing? > > > > It will always obey narrowing (it must), but we can then widen the > > buffer temporarily inside some functions without caring about the > > semantics of the narrowing and its source/purpose. > > > > Here I'm confused, that sentence seems to contradict the previous one. > "It" in "it will always obey narrowing" is the parser, right, and > "narrowing" is "the narrowing bounds set by 'treesit-make-parser'", right? See above. I hope that explains what I meant.