[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

From: Stephen Leake
Subject: Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 11:38:36 -0700
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (windows-nt)

Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:

>> On Jul 29, 2021, at 7:12 PM, Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> 
>> wrote:
>> That's true for the common TS runtime, which implements the parser and
>> error recovery, but the code for each language, that builds the LR parse
>> table and some other data structures, is generated in C from a grammar
>> file written in javascript, and must be linked into Emacs somehow.
> Languages don’t need to be linked into Emacs. They can be in dynamic
> modules.

Dynamic modules are linked, at run-time. That's how the code that calls
them knows what addresses to call.

So I think you are saying the tree-sitter runtime will be 
linked into Emacs at emacs compile time, while the languages can be
linked in at run-time. That's good.

-- Stephe

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]