> From: Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> > Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 13:49:50 -0800 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, > emacs-devel@gnu.org, > monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, > theo@thornhill.no > > > > > On Nov 19, 2022, at 1:39 PM, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote: > > > > On 19.11.2022 12:26, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >>> From: Yuan Fu<casouri@gmail.com> > >>> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 01:41:47 -0800 > >>> Cc: Stefan Monnier<monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, > >>> Eli Zaretskii<eliz@gnu.org>, > >>> Theodor Thornhill<theo@thornhill.no> > >>> > >>> Anyway, does anyone think this is a good/bad idea? Should I go implement > >>> this on css, js, c, etc? It can also be the other way around: instead of > >>> having c-mode being the virtual mode, we can leave c-mode as-is, and have > >>> a c-base-mode inherited by c-mode and c-ts-mode. And similarly > >>> rss-base-mode, rss-mode, and rss-ts-mode. > >> I'd prefer leaving the original modes as-is. That should cause less > >> compatibility problems, I think. > > > > Eli, what's your solution for the problem, then? > > > > E.g. js-mode enables tree-sitter, and installs some stuff based on it. > > > > But js2-mode inherits from js-mode (meaning, it will run the same setup > > code, and then some of its own), yet it has its own parser. Which will > > cause all sorts of conflicts with tree-sitter. > > Actually, thatâs evidence supporting his preference: js-mode will remain to > be the native implementation, so inheriting from it is exactly as before. > Js-ts-mode will install tree-sitter stuff. And js-base-mode wouldnât do much. Why do we need js-base-mode? what will it do?
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4