[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#60655: 30.0.50; tree-sitter: `treesit-transpose-sexps' is broken.
From: |
Theodor Thornhill |
Subject: |
bug#60655: 30.0.50; tree-sitter: `treesit-transpose-sexps' is broken. |
Date: |
Mon, 09 Jan 2023 07:38:16 +0100 |
Mickey Petersen <mickey@masteringemacs.org> > The tree-sitter-enabled function,
`treesit-transpose-sexps', that is called by transpose-sexps, is broken.
>
> It uses a naive method of sibling adjacency to determine
> transpositions. But it is unfortunately not correct.
>
> Python:
>
>
> def -!-foo():
> pass
>
> Turns into this with `C-M-t':
>
> def ()foo:
> pass
>
> But it ought to be:
>
> foo def():
> pass
>
>
> It's swapping two siblings that are indeed adjacent in the tree, but
> not on screen, which is confusing and a regression from its previous
> behaviour.
>
I can try to make transpose-sexps rely on only swapping "allowed"
node-types? That would be able to keep the new, better function, yet
still disallow these syntax-breaking transposes. What do you think?
> You could make a cogent argument that both approaches are wrong from a
> syntactic perspective, but I think that misses the broader point that
> `C-M-t' now does something errant and unexpected.
I don't really see how "foo def():" is any better at all. We gain some
great improvements with this "naive" method - namely:
if 5 + 5 == 10 then 10 else 100 + 100. If point is on the else the 100
+ 100 wil be swapped by 10, but the old behavior will be broken.
>
> Worse, it's not possible to revert to the old behaviour (see
> bug#60654)
>
>
Right.
Thanks,
Theo