[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitte
From: |
Stephen Leake |
Subject: |
Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter |
Date: |
Fri, 30 Jul 2021 11:38:36 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (windows-nt) |
Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Jul 29, 2021, at 7:12 PM, Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
>> wrote:
>> That's true for the common TS runtime, which implements the parser and
>> error recovery, but the code for each language, that builds the LR parse
>> table and some other data structures, is generated in C from a grammar
>> file written in javascript, and must be linked into Emacs somehow.
>
> Languages don’t need to be linked into Emacs. They can be in dynamic
> modules.
Dynamic modules are linked, at run-time. That's how the code that calls
them knows what addresses to call.
So I think you are saying the tree-sitter runtime will be
linked into Emacs at emacs compile time, while the languages can be
linked in at run-time. That's good.
--
-- Stephe
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, (continued)
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Andrei Kuznetsov, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Dmitry Gutov, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Dmitry Gutov, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Daniele Nicolodi, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Perry E. Metzger, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/28
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Stephen Leake, 2021/07/29
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Yuan Fu, 2021/07/29
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter,
Stephen Leake <=
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Andrei Kuznetsov, 2021/07/29
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Arthur Miller, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Óscar Fuentes, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Arthur Miller, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Ergus, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Arthur Miller, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Arthur Miller, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Ergus, 2021/07/30
- Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Maybe we're taking a wrong approach towards tree-sitter, Arthur Miller, 2021/07/30