Re: Turing on tree-sitter

[Philip Kaludercic]

Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:

>> On Oct 9, 2022, at 11:46 PM, Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> wrote:
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>>>> Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2022 16:25:17 +0300
>>>> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>>>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, casouri@gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>>> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>
>>>>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2022 12:26:09 +0000
>>>>> 
>>>>> One more thing, it looks like the usage of tree-sitter is enabled for
>>>>> python by toggling `python-use-tree-sitter'.  Will every mode now have
>>>>> this kind of an option?  I would hope not...
>>>> 
>>>> That's a separate discussion, so please start a new thread.
>>> 
>>> So here I am, starting that separate discussion.

Sorry, I missed the message.

>>> Since tree-sitter support is per-language, I do think it makes sense
>>> for each mode to have its tree-sitter support turned on separately.
>>> But we could also have a global "turn on tree-sitter support in every
>>> mode that has it" option, which will turn this on for those modes
>>> which can be supported by tree-sitter, if the appropriate
>>> language-support library is installed.
>>> 
>>> Comments?
>> 
>> +1 for this, but also keep the per-modes customs.  Then we can eat the
>> cake and have it too.
>> 
>> Such a mechanism can be made later, I think?
>> 
>> Theo
>
> +1 for this, but also add a third possible value to per-mode customs
> that keeps tree-sitter always off for the mode. That way someone can
> enable tree-sitter for all but that mode. Are there precedents for
> such ternary variables? nil, t, and 'never?

Is there a reason we can't use a minor mode?  Something like

        (add-hook 'python-mode-hook #'treesit-mode)

or a list

        (add-to-list 'treesit-modes 'python-mode)

?

> Yuan