Re: Creating a paradigm for leveraging Tree Sitter's power

[Perry Smith]

> On Dec 24, 2022, at 04:07, Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> wrote:
> 
> Yeah. One shortcoming of tree-sitter imo is that the parser author decides 
> what the nodes are named. So I think we need to create a framework so that 
> every mode can map over ast-names to Emacs concepts. The goal must be for the 
> normal Emacs things to require little to no changes, but get the benefits 
> from treesit.

To me, in my brain, Tree Sitter is far more expressive and powerful than 
existing concepts.  “Little to no changes” to me implies fitting a much larger 
concept into a smaller container and sacrificing the possible expressiveness 
and power.

> I think we should just start doing that immediately on the master branch and 
> allow for "big" changes going forward. We should settle on something good for 
> Emacs 30, hopefully.
> 
> I'm a little worried we feel we need "complete" proposals too soon.
> 
> Let's get all good ideas on the table, implemented and installed, then we can 
> consolidate after we discover pain points etc.
> 
> I'm working on changing the forward/backward thing and transpose. Not only 
> for tree-sitter, but for others as well :)
> 
> What do you think?

Yes.  I completely agree.  I guess for others, you can take my initial post as 
“this is the direction I’m exploring in” but it is helpful to get feedback of 
new ideas and experiences from past mistakes.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP