bug#61374: 30.0.50; Wrong mark-sexp with tree-sitter

[Ergus]

On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Theodor Thornhill wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > > From: Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no>
> > > Cc: spacibba@aol.com, casouri@gmail.com, 61374@debbugs.gnu.org
> > > Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2023 10:41:52 +0100
> > >
> > > > Can you show some examples that illustrate these issues?  I'm not sure
> > > > I follow your line of reasoning, and thus cannot understand the
> > > > relevant considerations and decisions, and their expected effects on
> > > > behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > consider same code as in the first mail:
> > >
> > > {
> > >   vector<int> myvar;
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > If point is before the first curly, C-M-f will move to after the semi.
> > >
> > >
> > > if "compound_statement" is added to the regexps, it will move to after
> > > the closing curly - all good.
> > >
> > > Now if point is at the c in 'vector', now we will also move to after the
> > > closing curly, not the first space or after the semi.
> >
> > Sounds like the treesit sexp movement doesn't have any notion of the
> > "level" of the sexp or something?  IOW, it doesn't know about the
> > "innermost" sexp at point?  If so, can we teach treesit.el about that?
>
> Yes, I think we should too.  I'll look into it.
Hi:

I am not aware of the details in the treesit.el implementation for
emacs, but the treesit-api already provides the ts_node_start_point and
ts_node_end_point functions which are intended for this use.

Are we relying on that?

> > Or am I missing the point?
>
> Nope, don't think so!
>
> Theo