bug#60025: [PATCH] Add go-ts-mode and go-mod-ts-mode

[Randy Taylor]

On Wednesday, December 14th, 2022 at 16:27, Theodor Thornhill 
<theo@thornhill.no> wrote:
> 
> Randy Taylor dev@rjt.dev writes:
> 
> > On Wednesday, December 14th, 2022 at 14:55, Yuan Fu casouri@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > > > I am having a tiny bit of trouble with a go.mod indentation rule. Using 
> > > > the patch, create a go.mod file anywhere, activate go-mod-ts-mode and 
> > > > add the following:
> > > > 
> > > > require ()
> > > > 
> > > > Place point inside the parens, and then hit enter. The expectation is 
> > > > that point will end up indented inside that block. If you add the text 
> > > > "test v1.0.0" and hit TAB, it will indent properly (and if you hit 
> > > > enter after that text it will indent properly for the next entry). If 
> > > > you go to the end of the line for the top paren and hit enter, it will 
> > > > not indent (and we want it to). It seems to give us no-node in that 
> > > > circumstance. Is there a simple indent rule that can match exactly that 
> > > > that I'm missing?
> > > 
> > > I think you can just test for the parent? In C, if point is at an empty 
> > > line after a statement in a block, like this:
> > > 
> > > int main() {
> > > return 0;
> > > |
> > > }
> > > 
> > > The matched rule is (parent-is “compond_statement”), where 
> > > compound_statement is the block. In your case, I guess you can test if 
> > > parent is the argument list.
> > > 
> > > Yuan
> > 
> > I do match for the parent, but it doesn't seem to help.
> > Here's what tree-sitter explorer shows for the following:
> > require (
> > 
> > )
> > 
> > (require_directive require ( \n ) \n)
> > 
> > If I put point on the line right below r and do C-S-a, tree-sitter explorer 
> > shows:
> > (require_directive require (*\n ) \n)
> > The * indicates that part is highlighted.
> > 
> > The second I make it "proper" like so:
> > require (
> > test v1
> > )
> > 
> > I can hit TAB and it will indent properly (but not anything above it, only 
> > that line and anything below).
> > 
> > I would think that checking parent-is for require_directive would be enough 
> > but it's not somehow???
> > It's instead matching my no-node rule...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I seem to remember seeing these \n nodes in the go-mode I made
> some time ago. There is no node there, so no-node is the rule that
> matches, as there is no parent. I believe you can solve it with
> something like
> 
> 
> (defun go-backward-up-list ()
> (lambda (node parent bol &rest _)
> (save-excursion
> (backward-up-list 1 nil t)
> (back-to-indentation)
> (point))))
> 
> and use some variant of that. Now you can find a different node without
> relying on there being a node where you start.
> 
> But I don't remember exactly.

Thanks, I'll give that a try.

> 
> BTW, I tried applying this mode, but it wouldn't apply.

Applying the patch? It applies to emacs-29 fine for me, and both modes work as 
expected when I try them. What issue(s) are you seeing specifically?