Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:

> The tree-sitter runtime, that Emacs would link with, it implemented in
> C, partly for this reason. It would be compiled with whatever Emacs is
> compiled with, or the system compiler.

Interesting.  I was not aware of that.

> Some of the tree-sitter development tools are implemented in Rust; you
> only need Rust if you are developing/fixing a grammar for a language.

If I understand this correctly, it means one would require the Rust
toolchain to support new languages in tree-sitter, or to improve
existing support.  Would that really fit Emacs?  I think many people
might not be comfortable learning such a large language and toolchain to
develop editing tools for Emacs.

Furthermore, is there any concrete reason this could not be done in
Lisp?

Note: Somehow I sent a reply earlier, and not a follow-up.  I apologize
for the duplicate.