Re: Renaming eglot -- or at least add an alias?

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > Because all of the interaction between server and client in lsp is json
  > > there's a huge overhead with parsing and shipping things into the emacs
  > > user interface.  So IMO what tree-sitter is good at should be left to
  > > tree-sitter.

Supposing this conclusion is valid (which seems plausible to me),
what does that imply about enabliing Eglot and Tree-sitter?

Should we have a command to enable both together (using Tree-sitter for
the jobs it can do, and Eglot for the others) or disable both together?

Should we have three levels of enablement?  (Neither one, Tree-sitter
only, or both)?


-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)