bug#59693: 29.0.50; treesitter in base buffer doesn't respond to modifications in indirect buffer correctly

[Stefan Monnier]

> Will this "hold water" vis-a-vis the expectations of various features that
> would like to use tree sitter related capabilities?  Regardless of your
> opinion on indirect buffers, many 3rd party packages and features use
> indirect buffers as the backbone of their implementation.  We don't
> currently have any alternatives to that, AFAIK.  So I'd expect a lot of
> disappointment if we declare that indirect buffers will not be supported by
> tree sitter as a matter of design decision.

I can't see why: a package that uses indirect buffers can just as well
run its tree-sitter parsers in the base buffer.

> Changing insdel.c to run stuff in base buffer could be a solution, but
> I don't feel we can make such changes on the release branch.

Agreed.

> But maybe we can do that now only for treesit.c functions.

Sounds OK to me, yes.


        Stefan