[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control
From: |
Theodor Thornhill |
Subject: |
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control |
Date: |
Thu, 26 Jan 2023 08:37:42 +0100 |
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> Cc: 60983@debbugs.gnu.org, theo@thornhill.no
>> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 18:52:33 +0200
>> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>>
>> > From: Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no>
>> > Cc: Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com>
>> > Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2023 12:48:58 +0100
>> >
>> > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> >
>> > > I started looking into providing user-level documentation for
>> > > tree-sitter based modes, and bumped into some issues:
>> > >
>> > > . How does one use treesit-font-lock-level?
>> > >
>> > > - It is not a customizable user option (unlike
>> > > font-lock-maximum-decoration), so it cannot be set via
>> > > customize-variable. Is there a reason not to make it a
>> > > defcustom?
>> > > - It automatically becomes buffer-local when set, and OTOH setting
>> > > it in a buffer does not produce fontifications according to the
>> > > level, and neither does setting it in a mode hook. So the only
>> > > way to change its value is by using setq-default, which I don't
>> > > think is the intent?
>> > > - Should we make the variable a defcustom?
>> > > - Should it be possible to customize it separately for each mode?
>> > > - Should we allow to change the level and then call some function
>> > > to re-fontify the current buffer according to the new level?
>> >
>> > I struggled with this too. I ended up setting it with setq-default,
>> > assuming I was just missing something very simple. I'm in favor for
>> > either a defcustom or honoring the font-lock-maximum-decoration values,
>> > specifically these settings:
>> >
>> > ```
>> > If t, use the maximum decoration available.
>> > If a number, use that level of decoration (or if not available the
>> > maximum).
>> > ```
>
> Let's just make it a defcustom for now, with the values it has today,
> including the default.
>
> The problems with honoring the value of font-lock-maximum-decoration
> are that (a) its default value is t in most (all?) modes, whereas we
> decided not to use 4 as the default value of treesit-font-lock-level;
> and (b) if changing treesit-font-lock-level's value doesn't require to
> kill the buffer and revisit the file (as I hope we will make it work),
> the instructions regarding changing the value of
> font-lock-maximum-decoration will depend on whether the mode does or
> doesn't use tree-sitter, which will make the instructions confusingly
> complex.
>
> Yuan or Theo, would one of you please make the change of making
> treesit-font-lock-level a defcustom, with a proper :set functions to
> avoid the need to revisit the file? My hands are too full ATM, and
> this issue is basically the only one which prevents me from updating
> the Emacs user manual with the tree-sitter info, which in turn is the
> only issue that blocks the move to releasing the 29.0.90 pretest
> tarball.
>
> TIA
I can take a stab at it :)
Theo
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, (continued)
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Theodor Thornhill, 2023/01/23
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Yuan Fu, 2023/01/23
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/01/23
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Theodor Thornhill, 2023/01/25
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Stefan Monnier, 2023/01/25
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Theodor Thornhill, 2023/01/26
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/01/26
- bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Theodor Thornhill, 2023/01/26
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/01/23
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Theodor Thornhill, 2023/01/28
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/01/28
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Theodor Thornhill, 2023/01/28
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/01/29
bug#60983: 29.0.60; Tree-sitter user-level control, Yuan Fu, 2023/01/26