From: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com>
To: Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>,
Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no>
Subject: Re: Recent updates to tree-sitter branch
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2022 15:33:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zgeeznl3.fsf@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59AE5D4B-39D2-4C18-BAC6-9C71B736F0D0@gmail.com>
Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>> I disagree. The current default in font-lock-keywords is not to
>> override. If programmatic font-lock behaves differently, it will be
>> confusing.
>
> I think the tree-sitter queries are different enough from font-lock keywords that it will not bring confusion. Further more, default to override should make things easier, especially to delicate things like string interpolation, or other nested constructs, where tree-sitter shines. By default, if the to-be-fontified region has any existing face, the whole fontification is given up instead of filling in new fontification. That would be IMO confusing because user would think the match failed.
I do agree that it may be confusing. Yet, it is how the default
fontification works. I do not think that tree-sitter matching is
conceptually different compared to regexp matching. (And this particular
area is not even limited to tree-sitter, AFAIU).
I do not insist on my idea being actually used, but wanted to leave a
data point to be considered.
> Also bear in mind that the override flag can only be applied to the whole query, rather than individual captured nodes.
How does it change anything? I may be misunderstanding something---can
you provide some illustrative example clarifying whole query vs.
individual notes?
--
Ihor Radchenko,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at https://orgmode.org/.
Support Org development at https://liberapay.com/org-mode,
or support my work at https://liberapay.com/yantar92
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-02 7:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-25 4:27 Recent updates to tree-sitter branch Yuan Fu
2022-09-25 6:17 ` Ihor Radchenko
2022-09-26 8:35 ` Yuan Fu
2022-09-26 9:43 ` Ihor Radchenko
2022-09-27 22:28 ` Yuan Fu
2022-09-29 4:01 ` Ihor Radchenko
2022-09-30 21:03 ` Yuan Fu
2022-10-01 4:20 ` Ihor Radchenko
2022-10-02 3:46 ` Yuan Fu
2022-10-02 7:33 ` Ihor Radchenko [this message]
2022-10-02 22:54 ` Yuan Fu
2022-10-03 5:58 ` Ihor Radchenko
2022-10-04 16:58 ` Yuan Fu
2022-09-29 10:13 ` Aurélien Aptel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87zgeeznl3.fsf@localhost \
--to=yantar92@gmail.com \
--cc=casouri@gmail.com \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=theo@thornhill.no \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.