From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Bozhidar Batsov" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Brand new clojure support in Emacs ;-) Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2023 10:54:12 +0200 Message-ID: <8c6c9daa-167c-47fc-9383-f02589854893@app.fastmail.com> References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <83v8djcydl.fsf@gnu.org> <87350ndquw.fsf@dfreeman.email> <83350ncbns.fsf@gnu.org> <87cyzrjbd8.fsf@dfreeman.email> <83zg2vav46.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7j99304.fsf@dfreeman.email> <87zg2hsyrd.fsf@dfreeman.email> <87h6ontwfv.fsf@posteo.net> <835y4ucrz3.fsf@gnu.org> <831qficgin.fsf@gnu.org> <87ttsehwab.fsf@dfreeman.email> <87fs3x6ge7.fsf@gmail.com> <87v8cthmzl.fsf@dfreeman.email> <87a5u56atj.fsf@gmail.com> <87r0nhhgb5.fsf@dfreeman.email> <87y1hp3pjm.fsf@gmail.com> <9b605d5a-3186-4764-b43d-854a68d04d0e@app.fastmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=ea0dbfe0779044589bb35e684a6ba804 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31682"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-701-g9b2f44d3ee-fm-20230823.001-g9b2f44d3 Cc: "Eli Zaretskii" , "Dmitry Gutov" , "Richard Stallman" , "Emacs Devel" To: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_T=C3=A1vora?= , "Danny Freeman" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 03 10:55:16 2023 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 1qcisz-0007wS-JI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 10:55:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qcisS-0003LR-Rw; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 04:54:40 -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 1qcisQ-0003JK-Uo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 04:54:38 -0400 Original-Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.19]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qcisN-0002qk-JX; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 04:54:38 -0400 Original-Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0B4C320025E; Sun, 3 Sep 2023 04:54:32 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from imap43 ([10.202.2.93]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 03 Sep 2023 04:54:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=batsov.dev; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1693731272; x=1693817672; bh=P2 sBpZa0EoqYbKmn6DMfBLiw9C/FKshXcimxBecLs48=; b=N2yx5ClfZCRTRhRMlQ 0pRb3YRPhkrf4bmnxLkEsxp9IaEfNZoJpc710TWMrksIJI40MSzUjlBjkLzME9Kr 26evrS21V280Wt0XxrEWKUXIxcyEJ5rRl9zC/TEsufjRBZQe9wrE17Bb/pSHXKMo Lyy/PurxByjSZ60ZHXfjGwCJxrUrUzhA8JrW7bJwA5im0LHyRmDI0b4/2KGXeUJA +vaM4eqLNuptl3eIIK7+8bykSe5TP8qIolnfXOCZluPSknHhHx0VVVGdnOclwV+P U/VBDKZ+ywfZr3ED11RW2pWNxWLBeVekheQhSrP0ifRd1zb0FnkfNB/LSKkmKzvo yArg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1693731272; x=1693817672; bh=P2sBpZa0EoqYb Kmn6DMfBLiw9C/FKshXcimxBecLs48=; b=SJXJNd4SooG0dmCpR6nddiKdCR1Ga +yHEVgSqtm/JtzpVkpqdojm+D5w3eT0up111vqlx2fnWj2HRK/c4+TnjS9uqW5Sv IG/8KNDMN/4m1kui6gx8ql3xbP9D9/VjxJbOVDx5DvHax6defr37GfcKB8WLVwqk mR8oKf3k8EeQqsegdHN15saqFaQk3DdTZjYwQmUvWuRawInCf9dEDfOCnZqp7sm/ DSB5zH0ovFk9LMkb5n9OIyHfBWCbF5QvlVbak+lOOoeUXjnEi7BUdxV3/5SqtnWc JJzWS55QbgxntqchNYmfXFDNAjbFq4ixossFDVf4TL86tnRPLEs+EyJYg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedviedrudegiedgtdelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvfevufgtsegrtderreerreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfueho iihhihgurghruceurghtshhovhdfuceosghoiihhihgurghrsegsrghtshhovhdruggvvh eqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepvedvtdfgveevveejveelfeeuhfejffeileeufeetteei jeekkeefjeeuveegueefnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrg hilhhfrhhomhepsghoiihhihgurghrsegsrghtshhovhdruggvvh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i025946a9:Fastmail Original-Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id D181A2D40090; Sun, 3 Sep 2023 04:54:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface In-Reply-To: <9b605d5a-3186-4764-b43d-854a68d04d0e@app.fastmail.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=64.147.123.19; envelope-from=bozhidar@batsov.dev; helo=wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309945 Archived-At: --ea0dbfe0779044589bb35e684a6ba804 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please, excuse my many typos above. I was so affected when I wrote this = message that I didn't bother to proofread it before hitting "Send".=20 On Sun, Sep 3, 2023, at 10:33 AM, Bozhidar Batsov wrote: > Hi everyone! >=20 > I had decided at first to ignore this thread, given I'm on vacation th= is week, but its overall tone and directly really forced me to write som= ething here. (I have to admit I'm extremely upset while writing this ema= il) >=20 > 1. I was accused of being "hostile" at some point, but if this thread = is "friendly" and "constructive" I've been living in some fantasy world.= Repeatedly it has been claimed that: >=20 > - The maintainers of the Clojure tooling for Emacs don't know what it'= s best for it (even if the end users have been happy with their work for= a very long time and there's big structure already in place to support = the existing tooling) > - The Emacs core team developers are the only people who know what's b= est for the Clojure tooling - everyone else is "short-sighted", "unreaso= nable", "aggressive", etc. > - It doesn't matter what name they chose for an alternative package, a= s the pains of the end users are probably not important. Yeah, if you in= stall a mode named "clojure-mode" that doesn't happen to work with some = other packages depending on "clojure-mode" that's perfectly fine in term= s of user experience, right? >=20 > 2. Suddenly people who have not touched Clojure have realized that Clo= jure is a very important language and it needs to be supported by Emacs = OOTB. Where were you in the past 15 years? Would you have thought of Clo= jure at all if we haven't bothered to submit the Clojure packages to Non= GNU ELPA? (which started all those conversations) Don't bother to answer= here - I think that's quite obvious. >=20 > I'm still waiting to see a single actual Clojure user making the case = that something will be gained by going in the direction that the Emacs d= evelopers have been pushing for for the past few weeks. >=20 > 3. Why do you accuse me of having "my way or the highway" attitude whe= n you repeated ignore me and Danny and just power on with whatever you b= elieve to be right? Don't you think that dismissing other people's opini= ons in such a hostile way might be a bit counter-productive? >=20 > 4. I also learned that 15 years of work don't amount to much (accordin= g to you) and we can easily get more or less the same experience with 20= lines of code and LSP. From people who are not actually using Clojure = in any capacity (at least to my knowledge) >=20 > I've been nothing but a champion of Emacs for 20 years now, yet I feel= I'm being treated as an ignorant buffoon here, who wants to do (or not = do) things out of sheer spite and stupidity. If that your idea of buildi= ng a community - fine by me, but I don't want to be a part of this. Afte= rwards don't argue that people like me are "uncollaborative", "short-sig= hted", "combative" or whatever else you believe to be the case.=20 >=20 > Instead of having a civilized conversation here, I've felt that it's o= nly "we know better" and to hell with how things used to happen. Sure, y= ou can do whatever you want, but I think that no one will be better off = if things in the community happen in this forceful manner. >=20 > I know all of you believe you're trying to solve a problem here, but f= rom my perspective you're creating a problem when there was none. The ro= ad to hell is paved with good intentions indeed... >=20 > In Emacs We Trust! M-x forever! >=20 > On Sat, Sep 2, 2023, at 11:14 AM, Jo=C3=A3o T=C3=A1vora wrote: >> Danny Freeman writes: >>=20 >> > I don't think so. CIDER and clojure-mode are developed in lock-step, >> > along side a couple other projects written in clojure to support CI= DER >> > from within the clojure repl process. The API is just the functions= that >> > CIDER calls from clojure-mode. If you want more information you wil= l be >> > best off reading the CIDER source. >>=20 >> OK. So at some point, if you want your new clojure-ts-mode to be >> integrated with CIDER, a more formalized API will have to emerge for >> your new mode to adhere to. It would be a good service to everybody = to >> take opportunity to document it and formalize it. >>=20 >> > I see your other message where you discovered some of my reasoning,= and=20 >> > I feel I've already explained my position. You will also see a later >> > message where I said once clojure-ts-mode is in a more "done" state= I >> > will revisit the question of inclusion here with other clojure-mode >> > devs. Until then I will continue to develop clojure-ts-mode in the >> > clojure-emacs github organization with the intention of integrating= it >> > with the rest of the clojure-emacs tooling. >>=20 >> AFAIK, putting your clojure-ts-mode in GNU Elpa core GNU Emacs does >> _not_ collide with the practice of developing in a GitHub organization >> nor with your intention of integration with some specific tooling... >>=20 >> I've had a look at clojure-ts-mode and is seems very young indeed. Is >> there any reason you didn't derive from lisp-data-mode? I think you >> should at least reuse lisp-data-mode-syntax-table instead of listing a >> very large entry that essentially repeats it. >>=20 >> I am curious about the performance and capabilities of tree sitter in >> Lisp modes. Lisp modes are perhaps the easiest modes things to parse >> and the ones Emacs has better support for. >>=20 >> Jo=C3=A3o >>=20 >>=20 >=20 --ea0dbfe0779044589bb35e684a6ba804 Content-Type: text/html;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Please, ex= cuse my many typos above. I was so affected when I wrote this message th= at I didn't bother to proofread it before hitting "Send". 

On Sun, Sep 3, 2023, at 10:33 AM, Bozhidar Batsov wrote= :
Hi everyo= ne!

I had decided at first to ignore this t= hread, given I'm on vacation this week, but its overall tone and directl= y really forced me to write something here. (I have to admit I'm extreme= ly upset while writing this email)

1. I was= accused of being "hostile" at some point, but if this thread is "friend= ly" and "constructive" I've been living in some fantasy world. Repeatedl= y it has been claimed that:

- The maintaine= rs of the Clojure tooling for Emacs don't know what it's best for it (ev= en if the end users have been happy with their work for a very long time= and there's big structure already in place to support the existing tool= ing)
- The Emacs core team developers are the only people = who know what's best for the Clojure tooling - everyone else is "short-s= ighted", "unreasonable", "aggressive", etc.
- It doesn't m= atter what name they chose for an alternative package, as the pains of t= he end users are probably not important. Yeah, if you install a mode nam= ed "clojure-mode" that doesn't happen to work with some other packages d= epending on "clojure-mode" that's perfectly fine in terms of user experi= ence, right?

2. Suddenly people who have no= t touched Clojure have realized that Clojure is a very important languag= e and it needs to be supported by Emacs OOTB. Where were you in the past= 15 years? Would you have thought of Clojure at all if we haven't bother= ed to submit the Clojure packages to NonGNU ELPA? (which started all tho= se conversations) Don't bother to answer here - I think that's quite obv= ious.

I'm still waiting to see a single act= ual Clojure user making the case that something will be gained by going = in the direction that the Emacs developers have been pushing for for the= past few weeks.

3. Why do you accuse me of= having "my way or the highway" attitude when you repeated ignore me and= Danny and just power on with whatever you believe to be right? Don't yo= u think that dismissing other people's opinions in such a hostile way mi= ght be a bit counter-productive?

4. I also = learned that 15 years of work don't amount to much (according to you) an= d we can easily get more or less the same experience with 20 lines of co= de and LSP.  From people who are not actually using Clojure in any = capacity (at least to my knowledge)

I've be= en nothing but a champion of Emacs for 20 years now, yet I feel I'm bein= g treated as an ignorant buffoon here, who wants to do (or not do) thing= s out of sheer spite and stupidity. If that your idea of building a comm= unity - fine by me, but I don't want to be a part of this. Afterwards do= n't argue that people like me are "uncollaborative", "short-sighted", "c= ombative" or whatever else you believe to be the case. 

Instead of having a civilized conversation here, I've = felt that it's only "we know better" and to hell with how things used to= happen. Sure, you can do whatever you want, but I think that no one wil= l be better off if things in the community happen in this forceful manne= r.

I know all of you believe you're trying = to solve a problem here, but from my perspective you're creating a probl= em when there was none. The road to hell is paved with good intentions i= ndeed...

In Emacs We Trust! M-x forever!

On Sat, Sep 2, 2023, at 11:14 AM, Jo=C3=A3o T= =C3=A1vora wrote:
Danny Freeman <danny@= dfreeman.email> writes:

> I don't= think so. CIDER and clojure-mode are developed in lock-step,
<= div>> along side a couple other projects written in clojure to suppor= t CIDER
> from within the clojure repl process. The API= is just the functions that
> CIDER calls from clojure-= mode. If you want more information you will be
> best o= ff reading the CIDER source.

OK.  So a= t some point, if you want your new clojure-ts-mode to be
i= ntegrated with CIDER, a more formalized API will have to emerge for
<= /div>
your new mode to adhere to.  It would be a good service t= o everybody to
take opportunity to document it and formali= ze it.

> I see your other message where = you discovered some of my reasoning, and 
> I feel= I've already explained my position. You will also see a later
=
> message where I said once clojure-ts-mode is in a more "done" = state I
> will revisit the question of inclusion here w= ith other clojure-mode
> devs. Until then I will contin= ue to develop clojure-ts-mode in the
> clojure-emacs gi= thub organization with the intention of integrating it
>= ; with the rest of the clojure-emacs tooling.

AFAIK, putting your clojure-ts-mode in GNU Elpa core GNU Emacs does
_not_ collide with the practice of developing in a GitHub o= rganization
nor with your intention of integration with so= me specific tooling...

I've had a look at c= lojure-ts-mode and is seems very young indeed.  Is
th= ere any reason you didn't derive from lisp-data-mode? I think you
should at least reuse lisp-data-mode-syntax-table instead of lis= ting a
very large entry that essentially repeats it.

I am curious about the performance and capabilit= ies of tree sitter in
Lisp modes.  Lisp modes are per= haps the easiest modes things to parse
and the ones Emacs = has better support for.

Jo=C3=A3o
=



<= /body> --ea0dbfe0779044589bb35e684a6ba804--