Re: Plug treesit.el into other emacs constructs

[Kévin Le Gouguec]

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
>> Cool, thanks, a few comments (based on my experience with adding
>> similar things based on `smie`):
>>
>>> ** Forward-sexp:
>>> Executing C-M-f repeatedly will go from:
>>> ```
>>> public void foo(|String bar, String baz) {}
>>> ```
>>> to
>>> ```
>>> public void foo(String bar|, String baz) {}
>>> ```
>>
>> That looks wrong.  `String` is a valid AST node.  Whether it gets a node
>> in tree-sitter or not, I don't know, but here there are several "sexps"
>> that start at point and I think `forward-sexp` should be conservative
>> and keep advancing by the smallest option.
>
> ada-mode has something similar; forward-sexp goes to the next labeled
> keyword. That's more useful than stopping at every little AST node. It
> relies on markup in the grammar to label the keywords; tree-sitter would
> need another markup similar to the current indent markup.

Chiming in since I got bitten by this in ada-mode right now: as someone
used to mark long_identifiers_with_underscores with C-M-SPC in other
modes, it's tripping me up that mark-sexp (and sexp movement in general)
"overshoots" and goes over much bigger expressions in ada-mode.

Identifiers are a unit I manipulate much more often than other kinds of
expressions, so it's useful for me to have C-M-* recognize them.  I find
it tolerable to "spam" C-M-* when needed to move over bigger units; YMMV
🤷