Re: Call for volunteers: add tree-sitter support to major modes

[Theodor Thornhill]

On 11 October 2022 23:38:18 CEST, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> 
wrote:
>> In some cases, such as the two I mentioned, nothing.  With others, such
>> as go-mode, something.  This could be some integration with package
>> managers, documentation lookup functions, etc.  In most cases, but not
>> all this is solved by LSP.  In the cases where there are benefits in the
>> original mode that needs to be handled case by case.
>
>"Solve by LSP" will only solve it for some users.  To best server the
>users, we still need to actively make efforts to integrate the old and
>the new modes, such as by making the old mode into a derived mode of the
>new mode, and then move missing features from the old mode to the
>new one.
>
>Experience tells me that if there's a builtin mode and a third-party
>mode, their natural course is to diverging.  That results in more work,
>worse modes, and a poor user experience (silly choice between two
>similar contenders, confusing info on the web, ...).
>
>It's very hard to integrate two different modes after the fact, so we
>should make sure the new mode is integrated with the old one from the
>start (usually by making the old mode a derived mode of the new one),
>and work together with the old mode's maintainer to keep them in-sync
>and reduce the differences over time.
>

I agree. The point is, though, for c# and ts specifically, they have huge 
outstanding issues already rendering them obsolete. Other modes are in a way 
better state, and where it matters we should absolutely do as you suggest. 

I'm holding off c# for now because that one is cc mode based, whereas ts can 
leverage js-mode. 

Theo