bug#60197: 30.0.50; beginning-of-defun broken after new treesit impl

[Theodor Thornhill]

Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:

> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>
>> On 21 December 2022 07:50:04 CET, Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi, Yuan!
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems 'prog-fill-reindent-defun' is broken after the latest changes
>>>>> to treesit-beginning-of-defun.  The culprit is that we now use remap
>>>>> instead of setting the beginning-of-defun-function.  What is the
>>>>> reasoning behind that change?  Can't we just rely on the variable
>>>>> beginning-of-defun-function?
>>>>
>>>> Not really, end-of-defun uses beginning/end-of-defun-function in a way
>>>> that’s incompatible with nested defuns[1]. So if we want to support
>>>> navigation nested defuns reliably we need to remap the commands instead.
>>>> In the future (ie emacs 30), we can extend the current
>>>> beginning/end-of-defun to support nested defuns, then we don’t need to
>>>> remap the commands anymore.
>>>
>>>I see the problem now... Many other functions uses
>>>beginning/end-of-defun. I didn’t thought about that initially :-(
>>>
>>>But I don’t want to make big changes to beg/end-of-deun, hmmm.
>>>
>>>Yuan
>>
>>
>> I think you can set the functions and remap, right? Maybe you can
>> force the beginning-of-defun-function variant to choose the smallest
>> scope as a default? Or just follow the same tactic the user set?
>
> Maybe, we can have beg-of-defun-function respect treesit-defun-tactic,
> and end-of-defun-function simply jump to the end of the defun at point,
> and remap the commands as we do now. I’ll experiment with that and see
> if it works well.

Sure!  Do you mean some treesit-specific code inside of
beginning-of-defun, or just making treesit-beginning-of-defun callable
non-interactively?

Theo