From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Yuan Fu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#60376: 29.0.60; Standardize csharp-ts-mode's font-lock features Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2022 14:16:13 -0800 Message-ID: References: <7A5618C7-25D7-4B52-8D16-5C54F09FA4CA@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7057"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 60376@debbugs.gnu.org, jostein@kjonigsen.net, theo@thornhill.no To: Jostein =?UTF-8?Q?Kj=C3=B8nigsen?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 29 23:17:39 2022 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 1pB1DX-0001fb-2n for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 23:17:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pB1DC-0003rU-4z; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:17:18 -0500 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 1pB1Cx-0003ob-AD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:17:05 -0500 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 1pB1Cw-0005oD-8a for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:17:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pB1Cv-0001rL-Me for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:17:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <7A5618C7-25D7-4B52-8D16-5C54F09FA4CA@gmail.com> Resent-From: Yuan Fu Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2022 22:17:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 60376 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 60376-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B60376.16723521857097 (code B ref 60376); Thu, 29 Dec 2022 22:17:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 60376) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Dec 2022 22:16:25 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33092 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pB1CK-0001qO-Eu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:16:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qt1-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:38772) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pB1CH-0001q9-Ep for 60376@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:16:22 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qt1-f174.google.com with SMTP id z12so16019883qtv.5 for <60376@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 14:16:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:cc:date:message-id:subject:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=RZZJo+QR3qKVE/QQZfYpUsy+UbFV5wwvrykKKCgkap4=; b=cmOOs4MNvN5bUP9b9K9RGF+5gxQOl/79i4JE20s7bPHaWdF6pbTQ1/r4i0rKEZfAUo OYnCENqYkZSkX5o355sVj2LijUiGPK2InFNofvcxK5n4IF7s8HBGUt+JnkLx+z3JLm4e GOuFImq/IFUKZXkwR6glsJIb5yf8RTDACqvgOE3eTsAWdGyKtTytDXgOH0hPQBA2LU2o VBsgRMcebRmfhtXMaTyBY2VWsGFZWXc9bKp4QJfkBOrX/i5ecnMWweVnr08t4snWjnGN QEJP3NaI5ie5eLwt/LIywkL33SsdjiP9PPFOUyDky9U7muoP5ebBjcRsE+GsS29WhQ5A A4XA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:cc:date:message-id:subject:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=RZZJo+QR3qKVE/QQZfYpUsy+UbFV5wwvrykKKCgkap4=; b=pRq50d2Y4SpS1JlkVtJWC5l33xCewIPJSmZ/mIRP3N7InQ0xUQo82O/KmWwRX+V02Q wlw/l558XUxoiL2Q6/1xnD6biWNDGAWg7cwC+pcGb/56lteujUQH945y5EQ26pEVZ6jM GHhKcUVSBx3QI/izhY4KAp8IQ97ItaiCmspPEZL8GEdCJuiG+VlvMMKdcV5A8bwXZu+4 DZ+NMPPeBfbcspH1972/tDWy5Too8W6Z9t8ab8EhzeQKH9e+3on+nHolTCiVcJtTXe3r KS/yIitVvkHK9LsUy8qMEwIzEA21Tta3SrzUZx5ete+LWjSi/f43Kikte9sZjG3k0dnv EfhA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kpsdIPvYe7KKIYK33swnq/+vPJXwHZHAIFcZahu33JkyAlBOitS sjjTALpiosLopGAH5XFoEks6mw/a2z4iHQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXu618nlrIjaanYqRinifydsUh8cMxfDWrGkk7RRgqB16XigryNJU1XVBkfD5vxm/EXuG9hu9g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:5c1a:b0:3a6:c4eb:2e52 with SMTP id gd26-20020a05622a5c1a00b003a6c4eb2e52mr44305886qtb.43.1672352175735; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 14:16:15 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from smtpclient.apple (cpe-172-117-161-177.socal.res.rr.com. [172.117.161.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bn35-20020a05620a2ae300b00702311aea78sm13706719qkb.82.2022.12.29.14.16.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Dec 2022 14:16:15 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) 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:252065 Archived-At: Jostein Kj=C3=B8nigsen writes: > Hey Yuan. > > Thanks for the heads up! > > To be quite honest, that's quite a lot of stuff in such a "little" = bug, so if it's OK, I think we should start on the top and work > our way down. > > So a "complete feature freeze" is approaching. That makes complete = sense, and I respect that. Are there any exact > deadlines or dates we'd like to stay ahead of, or is this more an = abstract thing, until Emacs 29 is eventually deemed ready > for release? I heard that it=E2=80=99s in a few days (from Eli). I believe the idea = is that no more new features could be added to emacs-29 branch, only bug fixes. This actually should=E2=80=99ve happened when emacs-29 was cut, but = tree-sitter features had an exemption because it was merged relatively late. > While standardizing font-lock features is probably a good thing, at = the end of the day, it does mean changing working > code. In that regard, I'd like to ensure we don't change more than we = need to, to not impose any unneeded risk near the > feature freeze and eventual Emacs 29 release. Basically, whatever = objections I may have, please assume them to be in > good faith. > > As far as standardizing the features, which bar are we standardizing = them against, or along with? Are other modes > getting standardized as well? In case, which? I=E2=80=99m working on python and javascript. Newer modes I think more = or less follows the "standard list" since they are created after the discussion of that list. > To take a personal nitpick as an example... python-ts-mode does not = even highlight function-invocations, despite me > having sent in patches to fix that[1]? How does that play into this = standardization? I can't say I've seen much response to > my bug-report or patch so far, and I mean... We can't standardize = features which are not yet even implemented, right? In > which case, I feel some issues should take precedence over others. I applied your patch, with some modification (so it aligns with the standard list). Looking at the bug report, I must=E2=80=99ve forgot to = reply to you after I made the change. That=E2=80=99s my fault. > I'm not trying to be difficult or anything, but whenever I hear about = standardization, I feel these are important questions > to ask. Left unresolved they can often leads to disenfranchising = people from their own works, if they are left feeling like > they are forced to make changes they disagree with or dont see the = benefits of. > > I really think this "small" part could definitely use a little more > details. What's our grand plan? To make features of each tree-sitter major mode more consistent. We wouldn=E2=80=99t want features that has the same name but different = meaning, or features of the same meaning but different name. > How many major-modes does it involve? Ideally all the built-in major modes. > And last how much time do we have? Basically: is the overall plan = realistic within the timelines we have? I=E2=80=99m merely suggesting potential improvements to csharp-ts-mode. = As the maintainer of it, whether it is possible or desirable to make the changes will be your call ;-) > So before moving into details about csharp-ts-mode specifically, I'd = love to see at least some links to the discussion space > where the overall standardization has been discussed. The initial discussion happened on here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-11/msg01544.html I just posted a general call to standardize major mode font-lock features, which stirred up a new discussion about the standard list (as discussion on mailing lists go :-), it started at here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-12/msg01202.html Maybe I should CC people that would be interested in such discussion. > For the time being, or for now at least, I would be against any = standardization-related changes taking place in > csharp-ts-mode until I've seen such a discussion and been able to = raise my voice about any concerns I may have there, if > any. > > Does that make sense? Or does that seem unreasonable or entitled of = me? Your doubts are completely reasonable. As I said, you are the maintainer of csharp-mode.el, not me, so you can regard my words as a suggestion rather than request. (Or perhaps nice suggestive request ;-) Yuan